GNU bug report logs - #62072
29.0.60; tree-sitter interferes with Custom

Previous Next

To reply to this bug, email your comments to 62072 AT debbugs.gnu.org.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: 29.0.60; tree-sitter interferes with Custom
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2023 18:17:22 +0800

On a build without some tree-sitter libraries, click:

  Options -> Customize Emacs -> Toplevel Customization Group

then click Programming -> Languages.  A warning about not being able to
find certain tree-sitter libraries will pop up.

Message #8 received at 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
Cc: 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#62072: 29.0.60; tree-sitter interferes with Custom
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2023 14:44:48 +0200

> From: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
> Cc: emacs-devel <at> gnu.org
> Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2023 20:06:51 +0800
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > Which missing grammar libraries cause this?  I tried a few, but
> > couldn't see any warnings.
> 
> All you have to do is click on "Programming -> Languages".  Here's one
> warning message I got:
> 
>  ■  Warning (treesit): Cannot activate tree-sitter, because language grammar for ruby is unavailable (not-found): (libtree-sitter-ruby libtree-sitter-ruby.so) No such file or directory

I already tried with ruby: I renamed the grammar library to another
name, but I don't see any warnings.  That's why I asked.

> but IIRC I also saw another errors on builds without tree-sitter at all.

That's a different situation, I think (I do see that in a build
without tree-sitter).

Message #11 received at 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#62072: 29.0.60; tree-sitter interferes with Custom
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2023 21:29:50 +0800

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
>> Cc: emacs-devel <at> gnu.org
>> Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2023 20:06:51 +0800
>> 
>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
>> 
>> > Which missing grammar libraries cause this?  I tried a few, but
>> > couldn't see any warnings.
>> 
>> All you have to do is click on "Programming -> Languages".  Here's one
>> warning message I got:
>> 
>>  ■  Warning (treesit): Cannot activate tree-sitter, because language grammar for ruby is unavailable (not-found): (libtree-sitter-ruby libtree-sitter-ruby.so) No such file or directory
>
> I already tried with ruby: I renamed the grammar library to another
> name, but I don't see any warnings.  That's why I asked.

That's odd... are you sure you don't have another Ruby library somewhere
else?

>> but IIRC I also saw another errors on builds without tree-sitter at all.
>
> That's a different situation, I think (I do see that in a build
> without tree-sitter).

Well, both have to be fixed.

Thanks.

Message #14 received at 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
Cc: 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#62072: 29.0.60; tree-sitter interferes with Custom
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2023 17:40:02 +0200

> From: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
> Cc: 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2023 21:29:50 +0800
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > I already tried with ruby: I renamed the grammar library to another
> > name, but I don't see any warnings.  That's why I asked.
> 
> That's odd... are you sure you don't have another Ruby library somewhere
> else?

Yes, because "M-x ruby-ts-mode RET" does complain aboiut the missing
library.

> >> but IIRC I also saw another errors on builds without tree-sitter at all.
> >
> > That's a different situation, I think (I do see that in a build
> > without tree-sitter).
> 
> Well, both have to be fixed.

No, not necessarily.

Message #17 received at 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#62072: 29.0.60; tree-sitter interferes with Custom
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 08:32:44 +0800

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
>> Cc: 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2023 21:29:50 +0800
>> 
>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
>> 
>> > I already tried with ruby: I renamed the grammar library to another
>> > name, but I don't see any warnings.  That's why I asked.
>> 
>> That's odd... are you sure you don't have another Ruby library somewhere
>> else?
>
> Yes, because "M-x ruby-ts-mode RET" does complain aboiut the missing
> library.

That's odd.  I will do a make bootstrap and ack.

> No, not necessarily.

Why?

Message #20 received at 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
Cc: 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#62072: 29.0.60; tree-sitter interferes with Custom
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 09:30:35 +0200

> From: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
> Cc: 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 08:32:44 +0800
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > No, not necessarily.
> 
> Why?

Because it's a known issue for which there's no known way of fixing it
without causing worse problems.  And because the problem is not very
severe and happens in relatively rare use cases.

Message #23 received at 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#62072: 29.0.60; tree-sitter interferes with Custom
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 16:33:43 +0800

I don't see the problem with ruby-ts-mode on emacs-29 after doing `make
bootstrap', but I still see it on master.

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
>> Cc: 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 08:32:44 +0800
>> 
>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
>> 
>> > No, not necessarily.
>> 
>> Why?
>
> Because it's a known issue for which there's no known way of fixing it
> without causing worse problems.  And because the problem is not very
> severe and happens in relatively rare use cases.

Why is this?

Message #26 received at 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
Cc: 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#62072: 29.0.60; tree-sitter interferes with Custom
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 13:47:49 +0200

> From: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
> Cc: 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 16:33:43 +0800
> 
> I don't see the problem with ruby-ts-mode on emacs-29 after doing `make
> bootstrap', but I still see it on master.

Master could take a couple of days to get the changes from the branch.

> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
> 
> >> From: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
> >> Cc: 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> >> Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 08:32:44 +0800
> >> 
> >> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
> >> 
> >> > No, not necessarily.
> >> 
> >> Why?
> >
> > Because it's a known issue for which there's no known way of fixing it
> > without causing worse problems.  And because the problem is not very
> > severe and happens in relatively rare use cases.
> 
> Why is this?

Why is what?

Message #29 received at 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#62072: 29.0.60; tree-sitter interferes with Custom
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 20:19:29 +0800

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

> Why is what?

I mean, why can't we wrap whatever in Custom is generating the warning
inside `with-no-warnings' for now?

Message #32 received at 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
Cc: 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#62072: 29.0.60; tree-sitter interferes with Custom
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 14:40:24 +0200

> From: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>
> Cc: 62072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 20:19:29 +0800
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > Why is what?
> 
> I mean, why can't we wrap whatever in Custom is generating the warning
> inside `with-no-warnings' for now?

If you can suggest a patch which affects only the cases where these
options are evaluated as part of a large group, that's fine by me.
The problem is that we _do_ want the warning if the use customizes
specific options that require tree-sitter.  If Customize can
distinguish between those, I'm all for warning in one case, but not in
the other.

Previous Next

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