Re: [SPAM UNSURE] Average-user-facing interface for tree-sitter

[Stephen Leake]

Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org> writes:

> Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> From the suggestions I collected from the old thread, here is my proposal:
>>
>> We define a custom option treesit-settings (we can discuss the name
>> later), which controls whether to enable/disable tree-sitter for each
>> major mode, and the default preference, like this:
>>
>> (defcustom treesit-settings '((t nil nil))
>>   "Tree-sitter toggles for major modes.
>>
>> A list of (MODE ENABLE INHERIT).  MODE is a major mode, ENABLE
>> can be one of the following:
>>
>>   demand => Demand the use of tree-sitter, warn if can't enable.
>>   t => Enable if available
>>   nil => Don't enable
>>
>> If INHERIT is nil, the setting does't apply to derived modes of
>> MODE, if t, the setting does apply.
>>
>> If MODE is t, the settings applies to all the modes which don't
>> have any setting.  INHERIT doesn't matter for this special
>> default setting."
>>   :type …)
>
> This is reasonable, but I think we will need finer control. LSP has
> dozens of features that can be individually supported or not by a given
> server. I don't think Emacs needs to go that far (although eglot does
> support that). I think separate control for face, indent, xref, and
> maybe imenu would be reasonable.
>
> In the above, perhaps ENABLE could be a symbol if it controls all
> features for a mode, or a plist to specify features separately:
>
> (mode (:face ENABLE :indent ENABLE ...) INHERIT).
>
> I'm not sure if INHERIT needs to be similarly split.

As I mentioned in my other email, also signature-help, completion,
diagnostics.

-- 
-- Stephe