bug#62333: 30.0.50; Issue with tree-sitter syntax tree during certain changes

[Dmitry Gutov]

On 25/03/2023 21:31, Yuan Fu wrote:
> I don’t think we should blindly widen in tree-sitter sexp functions, but not 
> because of mmm-mode—tree-sitter ranges should have that mostly covered. My 
> primary concern is that what if narrowing is intended by the caller?

Yes.

> But I don’t have any good idea for blink-matching right now.

show-paren-mode has show-paren-data-function (which treesit should also 
plug into, I think).

Since we're looking for ad-hoc solutions, we could add a similar 
extension point for blink-matching-paren.

Or even try to reuse show-paren-data-function: just specialize in a 
limited number of cases - check that (nth 1 data) matches point, and 
then take the elements 3,4 and perform the existing checks on them. 
There might be some differences in behavior, but probably nothing some 
checks using 'syntax-after' couldn't handle.