> the reasoning was like "we do not want to force an external dependency" It was not the optimal solution, agreed. The reason was actually that a significant t

> the reasoning was like "we do not want to force an external dependency" It was not the optimal solution, agreed. The reason was actually that a significant technical complexity was found while trying to adapt the existing modes. The syntax table vs. tree-sitter parse tree was simply too divergent for a mode to be just switched from one to the other. So the decision which I don't think anybody was completely happy with, but considered the only feasible way to move forward, to have new modes with tree-sitter. You can see some discussion here: https://old.reddit.com/r/emacs/comments/15g9cna/why_is_emacs_29_treesitter_a_new_major_mode/ https://old.reddit.com/r/emacs/comments/15g9cna/why_is_emacs... and quick link to the mailing list thread: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2022-12/msg01251.html https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2022-12/msg01...