3 ms·
Reliable? I trust Tree-Sitter's grammars a hundred times more than the underspecified regex monstrosities that power highlighting in other editors. Tree-Sitter
by p-e-w 4y ago
Reliable? I trust Tree-Sitter's grammars a hundred times more than the underspecified regex monstrosities that power highlighting in other editors.
Tree-Sitter grammars are unit tested, have usable primitives for precedence and associativity, and are generally far more predictable than previous highlighting systems.
Also, name a language for which there is no Tree-Sitter grammar yet. The only remaining ones are so obscure that the missing "fallback" is irrelevant for 99% of users.
- BaculumMeumEst 4y agoPython, Janet, Haskell, and Hare were the filetypes I remember either being unsupported or not working well. I need to be able to depend on basic language support from my text editor, even when I work with niche languages.
- WhyNotHugo 4y agoI've been using Python with tree-sitter on neovim for many months. It's great, and has a lot of improvements when compared with the old syntax system. Re Hare: I haven't even set that one up. Setting up a new tree-sitter on neovim requires extra work for each tree-sitter, and that's definitely a flaw that needs to be addressed.
- albertoCaroM 4y agoIs there Asciidoctor tree-sitter grammar? I can't find one.