GNU bug report logs - #73404
30.0.50; [forward/kill/etc]-sexp commands do not behave as expected in tree-sitter modes

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Juri Linkov <juri <at> linkov.net>
Cc: mickey <at> masteringemacs.org, casouri <at> gmail.com, theo <at> thornhill.no, monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca, 73404 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#73404: 30.0.50; [forward/kill/etc]-sexp commands do not behave as expected in tree-sitter modes
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 21:13:07 +0200

> From: Juri Linkov <juri <at> linkov.net>
> Cc: theo <at> thornhill.no,  casouri <at> gmail.com,  mickey <at> masteringemacs.org,
>   monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca,  73404 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 19:49:30 +0200
> 
> > Another variant is to leave treesit-forward-sexp as is,
> > and create a new function treesit-forward-sexp-with-list
> > that uses the 'list' thing.
> 
> This patch keep the current function treesit-forward-sexp,
> and creates a new function treesit-forward-sexp-list
> that uses the 'sexp-list' thing to navigate lists while
> using forward-sexp-default-function to navigate atoms:

Introducing a new command raises the question how should users
navigate using the two.  Will C-M-<RIGHT> invoke forward-sexp or the
new command (or maybe one or the other in some dwin-ish way)?

What are the problems with teaching treesit-forward-sexp do what the
new command does?  IOW, why do we need a new command?

Previous Next

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