3 ms·

Well, that's not the problem with TreeSitter. There is enough of this even with the default regexp-based syntax highlights. Anyway - one can always create a pe

• arp242 5y ago
  No, it's not; I never intended to imply it was. Like I said: "I would love to see something better". Making a syntax file right now that's 1) truly fully correct, and 2) fast is often quite hard to create and maintain. Most Vim defaults are fairly timid in comparison to what I've seen of tree-sitter. Right now the limitations often prevent too much "shizzle" from being added, which is useful in a kind of perverse sort of way. > Anyway - one can always create a perfect scheme for them to use. It requires making my own syntax files for every language I use, and starting or opening a new language now needs to begin with configuring this. Not really looking forward to such a future.
  • konart 5y ago
    >It requires making my own syntax files for every language I use, and starting or opening a new language now needs to begin with configuring this. Not really looking forward to such a future. Why would you need this (unless your language is not in https://github.com/nvim-treesitter/nvim-treesitter#supported-languages https://github.com/nvim-treesitter/nvim-treesitter#supported... ?)