Re: Tree sitter: Should *-ts-modes derive from a common base?

[Dmitry Gutov]

On 21/03/2023 11:30, Phil Sainty wrote:
> The case I've spotted thus far which wouldn't work is the CSS modes,
> where we have this:
>
> (define-derived-mode css-base-mode prog-mode "CSS"
> (define-derived-mode css-mode css-base-mode "CSS"
> (define-derived-mode css-ts-mode css-base-mode "CSS"
>
> That could be refactored if this idea was a sensible one.

How would you refactor it? We don't have multiple inheritance.

> Apologies if this has been discussed before... it seems like
> something which might have come up, but I couldn't find anything
> relevant.  I'm not across the tree-sitter work in general though,
> and maybe this is a bad idea for some reason.

There's been a bunch of discussions on the bug tracker, and at least one 
where the participants landed on the xxx-base-mode design. I don't have 
the bug number at hand, though.