GNU bug report logs - #59853
30.0.50; tree-sitter modes have unexpected beginning-of-defun behavior

Previous Next

Full log

Message #38 received at 59853 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Yuan Fu <casouri <at> gmail.com>
To: Theodor Thornhill <theo <at> thornhill.no>
Cc: leungbk <at> posteo.net, 59853 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#59853: 30.0.50; tree-sitter modes have unexpected 
 beginning-of-defun behavior
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2022 00:59:15 -0800

Yuan Fu <casouri <at> gmail.com> writes:

> Theodor Thornhill <theo <at> thornhill.no> writes:
>
>> Brian Leung <leungbk <at> posteo.net> writes:
>>
>>> Theodor Thornhill <theo <at> thornhill.no> writes:
>>>
>>>>> 2. When point is anywhere in the first line of the class 
>>>>> declaration, mark-defun highlights "void otherMethod()", 
>>>>> instead 
>>>>> of the entire class declaration.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, I think I've fixed this in a patch I just submitted.
>>>
>>> Which commit are you referring to?
>>>
>>
>> I believe it was the one I included as a patch here.
>>
>>>>> 3a. When point is at the [*] in between someMethod and 
>>>>> otherMethod, narrow-to-defun captures "void otherMethod()". I 
>>>>> feel 
>>>>> that since the methods inside the interface declaration have no 
>>>>> bodies, it makes more sense to capture the entire interface 
>>>>> definition if point is at [*].
>>>>
>>>> Maybe, but I don't believe this is wrong either.
>>>
>>> Let me rephrase my request. Consider the following example:
>>>
>>>> class Cow implements Animal {
>>>>   public void animalSound() {
>>>>     // The body of animalSound() is provided here
>>>>     System.out.println("The cow says: moo");
>>>>   }
>>>>
>>>> [*]
>>>>
>>>>   public void sleep() {
>>>>     // The body of sleep() is provided here
>>>>     System.out.println("Zzz");
>>>>   }
>>>> }
>>>
>>> Both the methods have bodies. If point is at the [*], I would like 
>>> for narrow-to-defun to capture the entire class declaration, since 
>>> point is not really contained in either method. (For this 
>>> particular example, java-mode presently agrees with java-ts-mode.)
>>>
>>> Is there a clean way of ensuring that, when point lies between 
>>> (and is not contained in) those two methods, point is not treated 
>>> as if it were in one of those methods' tree-sitter nodes?

That’s hard to do with the current narrow-to-defun, we can add a
new version that is aware of nested defuns and remap narrow-to-defun to
it in tree-sitter modes. In the future we can improve stock
narrow-to-defun to support nested defuns.

Yuan

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.