Christian Clason

@qrasmont it looks like the last commit broke CI -- could you bisect to make sure? (From the output, it looks like it's actually broken code rather than changed behavior.)

Without looking too deeply at the code, I suspect some sort of circular inclusion -- can you try replacing the `highlighter.active` with `M.highlighter.active` instead of requiring `vim.treesitter.highlighter` at the top?

@qrasmont what are your plans with this PR? Will you be able to finish it? (There are some other changes in the works that are waiting on this upstreaming.) Maybe...

> Without looking too deeply at the code, I suspect some sort of circular inclusion -- can you try replacing the `highlighter.active` with `M.highlighter.active` instead of requiring `vim.treesitter.highlighter` at the...

No worries, this is completely understandable! Let me know when I should look at something.

(Please don't merge master into PR branches! You should instead rebase your branch.)

The Lua API doesn't come with a strict contract like the `nvim_*` Neovim API (and treesitter support is explicitly declared as "experimental"), so it's not completely out of the question....

Hmm, that is quite breaking... Can we make the new behavior optional by adding a `{opts}` table with, say, `output_list = true` (default `false`)? (Adding new API functions is something...

Hmm, I'll have to defer on that to people with more experience with those (@lewis6991 ?) It might make sense then to rip the band-aid off quickly, but remember that...

OK, then let's rip that band-aid off :)