GNU bug report logs - #60961
29.0.60; Compiling emacs-29 without treesitter outputs warnings

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Theodor Thornhill <theo <at> thornhill.no>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: rpluim <at> gmail.com, casouri <at> gmail.com, 60961 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#60961: 29.0.60; Compiling emacs-29 without treesitter outputs warnings
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2023 17:07:28 +0100

On 20 January 2023 16:17:22 CET, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:
>> From: Theodor Thornhill <theo <at> thornhill.no>
>> Cc: rpluim <at> gmail.com, casouri <at> gmail.com, 60961 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2023 15:43:33 +0100
>> 
>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
>> 
>> >> So I can either just make sure that no modes require across modes, or
>> >> make that "lib" right now.  What do you think?
>> >
>> > I tend to the "lib" method.  Mostly because several modes, including
>> > some that are unrelated to C, want the code which was written for
>> > C/C++, and so it is possible that there's some general feature here
>> > waiting for us to refactor the code -- in which case perhaps the code
>> > should be in treesit.el?
>> >
>> > IOW, how come JS, Rust, and Typescript all want comment-related setup
>> > that was written for C?  If this is just a coincidence, then perhaps
>> > duplicating the code is a better idea, but if there's some underlying
>> > commonality, we should have common code in treesit.el, or maybe in
>> > some c-ts-common.el?
>> 
>> I can start by moving it into treesit.el, then we can maybe extract
>> something out later.  Sounds good?  I can do it tonight, unless any of
>> you object :)
>
>SGTM, but let's hear from Yuan before you start working on this.
>
>Thanks.

Thumbs up

Previous Next

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