[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: font-lock-syntactic-keywords obsolet?

From: Dmitry Gutov
Subject: Re: font-lock-syntactic-keywords obsolet?
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 19:09:56 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2

Hi Alan,

On 06/21/2016 06:26 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

my insistence that there
are several strategies which can be adopted for handling syntax-table
text properties.

This is the kind of vague statement that I've seen a lot, and does not further the discussion. Yes, there can be lots of approaches to doing stuff. It's a truism.

You seem to be of the opposite opinion, that there is
one single blessed way of doing this handling, and any other way is thus
the Wrong Thing.

No. Of any statements I've made the only one that sounds close is that when we're caching syntactic information in a buffer, there must be only one source of truth, and not multiple. That is from the comment-cache discussion.

Again, if you insist on continuing using the bare after-change-functions approach in CC Mode, I'm fine with that, provided you deal with all the performance-related consequences, and that you don't try to work around its problems by pushing solutions tailored to CC Mode to the core, ignoring the needs of the rest of the modes.

As far as I am aware, there has never been a general discussion on
emacs-devel about this topic.

Without consultation, meaning nobody asked you? Consider me consulted. And seeing how well this and related discussions are going, it's quite likely that the result of that would have been coming up with no new strategy at all, and giving up in disgust instead.

One isolated developer developed the
strategy you like, and he spread it around existing modes as far as he
could, again, without any consultation that I'm aware of.

The "isolated developer" has been an Emacs maintainer for many years, and the strategy in question has been in use for many years now, across many packages. So trying to reduce its current importance to "one isolated developer" is disingenuous, and rather insulting.

If that
discussion had taken place, likely the strategy would be better thought
out, more widely applicable, and better implemented with less resulting
bad feeling.

By now, you've had every chance to analyze its current usage, benefits, drawbacks, and present a decent alternative that does not regress in important aspects, which I'm sure is possible (everything has space for improvement).

Instead, we've only seen lots of opinionated statements, complaints about being forced to switch (this is between you and Stefan, although I also suspect that it could help deal with a lot of CC Mode's performance problems, current and future ones), and one flimsy and rather obvious bug report.

> ...
You've got a strategy in Ruby Mode which works, and you'll note I've
never tried to talk you into abandoning that strategy.

That's not true. You've critiqued it a lot (does that not count as persuading to abandon?), and you've tried to push a new incompatible facility that would cause problems for syntax-ppss users in the long run. Or, at least, is very likely to.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]