Re: Tree sitter support for C-like languages

[Yuan Fu]

> On Nov 13, 2022, at 5:26 PM, Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru> wrote:
> 
> On 14.11.2022 02:22, Yuan Fu wrote:
>> So if we want the warning face to automatically disappear, we need to record 
>> these warning faces and remember to come back to refontify them later. We 
>> need to know when to refontify them, and know when to stop trying to 
>> refontify them (maybe the error isn’t transient). For now I think it’s best 
>> to just not fontify the error nodes.
> 
> I'm guessing the situation could be the reverse as well: after the user 
> typing some chars, the warning would need to be *added* rather than removed, 
> in some cases.

That’s a good perspective. But from what I see I think it’s best not to fontify 
these “errors”, at least for C and C++. Because a lot of things could be marked 
“error” in a C file, like stuff around macros. And in extreme cases the whole 
file is marked “error”, even though if we ignore the error everything is parsed 
fine. I guess tree-sitter isn’t happy about some tiny thing in that file but 
never the less can parse everything correctly. I attached that file below.

> Any chance tree-sitter gives you some info/callbacks to convey the earliest 
> node (closes to bob) which has changed after the most recent buffer 
> modification? So we'd refontify starting with its beginning position.

Yes and no, I explained in more detail in another message.

subtree.h
Description: Binary data