[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#64018: 29.0.91; Improve tree-sitter docs
From: |
Basil Contovounesios |
Subject: |
bug#64018: 29.0.91; Improve tree-sitter docs |
Date: |
Tue, 13 Jun 2023 15:45:03 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) |
Eli Zaretskii [2023-06-13 09:31 -0400] wrote:
> But on second thought: why do you need the colon at all? What does it
> signifiy? If you must say that KEYWORD begins with a colon, just say
> that (although it's pretty clear), or maybe show an example.
I added a colon in this single instance for consistency with subsequent
paragraphs of the same function definition:
It takes a series of QUERY-SPECs, where each QUERY-SPEC is a QUERY
preceded by zero or more KEYWORD/VALUE pairs. Each QUERY is a
^^^^^^^
tree-sitter query in either the string, s-expression or compiled
form, or a function.
If QUERY is a tree-sitter query, it should be preceded by two
:KEYWORD/VALUE pairs, where the ‘:embed’ keyword specifies the
^^^^^^^^
embedded language, and the ‘:host’ keyword specified the host
language.
[...]
If QUERY is a function, it doesn’t need any :KEYWORD and VALUE
^^^^^^^^
pair. It should be a function that takes 2 arguments, START and
END, and sets the ranges for parsers in the current buffer in the
region between START and END. It is fine for this function to set
ranges in a larger region that encompasses the region between START
and END.
The same @var{:keyword}/@var{value} pattern also appears a couple of
times in the related '(elisp) Parser-based Font Lock'.
I don't mind what we go with, so long as it's used consistently across
paragraphs of the same definition. Which markup/wording do you prefer?
Thanks,
--
Basil