emacs-tree-sitter
Treesit.el Support
Hey @jcs090218 thanks for this great package, I think its a hugely important feature set in the emacs tree-sitter ecosystem. I'm curious what your plans are with regards to the new [built in treesit.el](https://github.com/emacs-mirror/emacs/blob/emacs-29/lisp/treesit.el) that is shipping with Emacs 29? Are you interested in having this package work with that?
I started experimenting with what that might mean in this PR and found the process of integrating with treesit.el to be pretty straight forward, but I wanted to understand how you were thinking about this before going any further.
If you're interested, I can go further with the PR. There are some unanswered questions, like would you want older versions to support the legacy emacs-tree-sitter package, and new versions to only support treesit.el, or one version that could swap between them etc. Interested to hear your thoughts.
Hi, Andrew! Thanks for liking this package! ❤️ Yes, I am interested to see things going with built-in tree-sitter support!
I am thinking of creating another package for built-in treesit support since ts-fold is heavily designed with emacs-tree-sitter. It depends on the complexity of switching between the two APIs! If it were easy to implement and wouldn't burden maintainers, then it should be good to build together!
If we go for the first route, it will be more straightforward since we would only have one abstraction layer regarding treesit. If we decide to build together, it's better to support both tree-sitter abstraction layers. The ultimate goal is to move from legacy emacs-tree-sitter to built-in treesit, so it's fine to drop the legacy support at some point. We should wait until treesit becomes popular, or consider stable.
Thank you for working on this. I might wait until Emacs 29 is out before I start working on this! Feel free to continue working on this! 😄
Cool, what I'll probably do is keep playing with my prototype to see if I can easily support both approaches in a single version. That will make it easier to merge changes from upstream too.
@garyo I have a fork working here that I'm using daily with both ruby and js. It seems to be working well.
I explored trying to get something that could easily toggle between built in tree sitter and the package, and I couldn't do it without basically writing a big whole compatibility later, which didn't seem worth it.
In general the transformation was just a find and replace though, with a few minor complications
I'm trying your fork now (the andrew-sw/treesit-el-support branch of that fork). I had to modify the ts-fold-range-alist to add the new -ts- major modes in the latest emacs, e.g. c++-ts-mode, but then it works OK.
Perhaps an alternative to doubling the size of that alist would be to look up using symbols that remove the "-ts", something like (intern (replace-regex-in-string "-ts-mode" "-mode" (symbol-value major-mode))?
The indicator mode isn't working yet but I can look into that.
I also found that ts-fold-close-all needs this small patch:
@@ -307,7 +319,7 @@ If the current node is not folded or not foldable, do nothing."
(interactive)
(ts-fold--ensure-ts
(let* ((node (treesit-buffer-root-node))
- (patterns (mapconcat (lambda (fold-range) (concat "(" (car fold-range) ") " "@name"))
+ (patterns (mapconcat (lambda (fold-range) (concat "(" (symbol-name (car fold-range)) ") " "@name"))
(alist-get major-mode ts-fold-range-alist) " "))
(query (treesit-query-compile (treesit-node-language node) patterns))
(nodes-to-fold (treesit-query-capture node query nil nil t)))
I'm trying your fork now (the
andrew-sw/treesit-el-supportbranch of that fork). I had to modify thets-fold-range-alistto add the new-ts-major modes in the latest emacs, e.g.c++-ts-mode, but then it works OK.Perhaps an alternative to doubling the size of that alist would be to look up using symbols that remove the "-ts", something like
(intern (replace-regex-in-string "-ts-mode" "-mode" (symbol-value major-mode))?
It seems we could remove the non ts-mode items if we aren't going to try to support both versions at the same time.
what is the status of this? is it considered safe to use ts-fold with emacs@29?
Hi, I will work on this after April, when 29.1 is released. I've tried 29.0.60 but couldn't get it to run smoothly. I will investigate more once I better understand treesit.el.
To answer your question, yes, it's safe to use this package in 29. However, it does not use the built-in treesit module. Hope the built-in tree-sitter support will be soon in the near future!
I am using Andrew's fork plus some patches (see above), my patches at https://github.com/AndrewSwerlick/ts-fold/pull/1, with emacs built from trunk a few days ago, with built-in treesit module. There are still some things to iron out with treesit-based major modes but it is basically functional.
I'll add I use my fork on my daily driver for both ruby and typescript with minimal issues. I haven't tested extensively with other languages though.
Thanks for all the information! One major issue is I use windows pretest snapshot, so it's not always on the latest master branch. Emacs-devel may have made some changes, so it causes API to be incompatible (it's normal). I will make sure I go deeper next time I try it out! ;)
FOR INFORMATION
I've started a fork of this package to port it to treesit for my personal use. I've got a usable treesit-fold package that I'm using in my Emacs installation.
https://github.com/abougouffa/treesit-fold
@abougouffa this looks good; how does it compare to @AndrewSwerlick 's version I wonder?
@garyo I was using @AndrewSwerlick's fork, but since he didn't update it from a while, I've tried to port ts-fold from the current master branch. I did inspire from Andrew's fork though.
I think it needs more testing, and I need to learn more about tree-sitter to be able to maintain it.
Feel free to open PRs for this. As long it works on both tree-sitter.el and treesit.el, I am happy to merge it! :)
@garyo I was using @AndrewSwerlick's fork, but since he didn't update it from a while
Yeah I'm not proactively maintaining my fork, but I am still using it, and will fix things that affect me or others as time allows. I haven't updated anything in a while because everything has just worked from my personal perspective.
Hi! Is there still an intention of merging fs-fold into build-in treesit.el?
Hi! Is there still an intention of merging fs-fold into build-in treesit.el?
Yes, we are! However, I haven't had a chance to use treesit.el, therefore, it won't be integrated any time soon.
ts-fold was a key package in my emacs 28 config. Is there a workaround to make it work in emacs 29 ?
I think you can use one of the forks from @AndrewSwerlick and @abougouffa. As stated above, I haven't had time to try the built-in treesit.el, but I am open for PRs if anyone wants to contribute to this package! :)
Hello, thank you maintainers for creating and improve this wonderful package, i tried to see how treesit.el library can be included in this package, however ts-fold has grown and matured enough that including support for treesit.el can complicate the development and maintenance of this package, i might suggest on making a standalone fork for supporting treesit.el based on @abougouffa one, and submit it to MELPA/NonGNU ELPA (and if possible to GNU ELPA too), i can help in making a fork of @abougouffa one and make little changes.
I don't think is that hard since we only need to handle translations between tree-sitter.el nodes and treesit.el nodes. Andrew has an early implementation in #47. 🤔 TBH, we only need a flag to let users decide what backend they want.
Another approach is to have a standalone package that requires this package as a dependency. That way, we don't have to rewrite the logic in ts-fold and only focus on the translation part. WDYT?
Hi @DevelopmentCool2449
It would be nice to do a standalone fork. My fork was just a first try, and being not an expert on how Tree-sitter works, I didn't manage to get the fork to work correctly on all cases (I remember having Emacs crashing when I try to fold/unfold some complex C/C++ files.
As for now, I'm using treesitter-context-fold-mode from treesitter-context which provide a basic support for code folding using built-in treesit.el.
I don't think is that hard since we only need to handle translations between
tree-sitter.elnodes andtreesit.elnodes. Andrew has an early implementation in #47. 🤔 TBH, we only need a flag to let users decide what backend they want.
You are right, watching that PR i think i can do an experimental treesit.el support based in that for availables parsers/modes in ts-fold. If it were to work I would like to send you a recipe for MELPA (i don't know about Non-GNU ELPA).
Another approach is to have a standalone package that requires this package as a dependency. That way, we don't have to rewrite the logic in
ts-foldand only focus on the translation part. WDYT?
It seems like a good idea to me, however i don't know if it would require install tree-sitter.el, A fork would allow only focusing in treesit.el and avoiding maintaining both implementation in 1 package.
It seems like a good idea to me, however i don't know if it would require install tree-sitter.el, A fork would allow only focusing in treesit.el and avoiding maintaining both implementation in 1 package.
You are right. 👍 One thing worth mentioning is that tree-sitter.el supports non -ts modes, but treesit.el does. So, it covers both cases. 🤔
You are right. 👍 One thing worth mentioning is that tree-sitter.el supports non
-tsmodes, but treesit.el does. So, it covers both cases. 🤔
By default, treesit.el is activated on -ts modes, however, we can use treesit functionalities on classical non -ts modes just by running:
;; Create `treesit` grammar for a XML file when in `nxml-mode'
(when (and (treesit-available-p) (treesit-language-available-p 'xml))
(treesit-parser-create 'xml))
I use this regularly to use treesit based packages on non ts modes.
Well, then i think i may start in the fork, i don't know if implementing it to ts-fold would require using or installing tree-sitter.el which would install all the parsers.
That would generate garbage for users that only want using treesit.el
If not, then i could start a PR instead forking.
By default, treesit.el is activated on -ts modes, however, we can use treesit functionalities on classical non -ts modes just by running:
👍
It makes more sense to have a new fork. :)