Subject: Re: bug#51572: [PATCH] tree-sitter-lock-mode

From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2021 19:47:16 +0100

dick <[email-masked]> writes:

> FWIW, fontification of xdisp.c under tree-sitter is under a
> second versus 17s for jit-lock (on my 10yo Thinkpad).

That's really cool.

Skimming the patch is rather difficult, though, because it contains so
many changes that seem irrelevant.  Like:

> -	(when (null (cdr elt))
> +	(unless (cdr elt)

And just snarky bits:

> +  "This was better embedded in a minor mode, obviously."

And a bunch of commentary that's been removed:

> -;; Rather than the function, e.g., `font-lock-fontify-region' containing the
> -;; code to fontify a region, the function runs the function whose name is the
> -;; value of the variable, e.g., `font-lock-fontify-region-function'.  Normally,

So I'm not sure where we're going with this.  Anybody got an opinion?

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no