8 ms·

I attempted to use this but was disheartened but the fact that it doesn't statically type node names. Tree Sitter doesn't either but it has much more of an excu

by timhh 3y ago

I attempted to use this but was disheartened but the fact that it doesn't statically type node names. Tree Sitter doesn't either but it has much more of an excuse given that it targets C. https://github.com/lezer-parser/lezer/issues/8 https://github.com/lezer-parser/lezer/issues/8 The dev seems mildly hostile to outside involvement too, so I moved on. These days I use Chumsky which is Rust rather than Typescript, but also way more awesome, if you can deal with the often incomprehensible compilation errors at least! https://github.com/zesterer/chumsky https://github.com/zesterer/chumsky

stevemk14ebr 3y ago
None of those responses were at all hostile
- lukan 3y ago
  He probably means this: "It's rarely a good idea to jump in and start a big refactor of someone else's library without first discussing the direction you're going in." But I agree, not hostile, just unwilling to do something, he does not want to do. Even if the other one already put work in it.
  - timhh 3y ago
    Yes it's unsolicited "advice" that shows an uncooperative attitude IMO. You can say "I don't want to do that" in a nice way without being patronising. If you look at the other closed MRs you'll see a similar attitude. E.g. here (I'd forgotten about this actually): https://github.com/lezer-parser/generator/pull/6#issuecomment-892007596 https://github.com/lezer-parser/generator/pull/6#issuecommen... Here https://github.com/lezer-parser/lr/pull/64#issuecomment-1802218165 https://github.com/lezer-parser/lr/pull/64#issuecomment-1802... It's nothing major but just emanates "difficult to work with" vibes so I didn't want to spend my time working with a project like that (looks like not many other people do either).
    - lukan 3y ago
      Well yes, he does not want to discuss the direction of developement. He decides that. If he thinks something is not helping, he won't do it. So sure, taking part in the project would mean accepting his way of things. So difficult to work with? Depends on your expectations I guess. And the comment above could have been maybe written nicer, but I see it as a defense of "no, I don't need to accept your PR just because you put work in it, you should have checked with me first, before doing it" Because he had those discussions quite often I think (I follow decelopement from time to time since quite a while)
      - timhh 3y ago
        > no, I don't need to accept your PR just because you put work in it, you should have checked with me first, before doing it Which is a bit rude IMO, and not really in the spirit of open source. I never demanded that he accept it. A PR is like "here's some code, let me know if it's ok" not "you should merge this code without question". Here is what I would have written: "Hi, thanks for the code but I don't think I want to go in that direction because X Y Z." (he didn't give any clear reasons so you'll have to imagine those). Anyway he's free to do his thing. I was just explaining why I moved away from that library.
        lukan 3y ago
        "Which is a bit rude IMO, and not really in the spirit of open source. I never demanded that he accept it. " Other people did before you. But I can see how you perceived that reaction to you as hostile. It was definitely a bit rude. I disagree a bit though, that it is not in the spirit of open source. Open source does not necessarily mean open for collaboration. He does accept PRs, if they fit his vision .. and get defensive, when they don't, because he don't want to spend energy arguing why not. He does not have to. So yes, it would be nicer, if he would be nicer. But he is the way he is and still he managed to build a great open source product.
    - rokkitmensch 3y ago
      The onus when working on an existing project is for new collaborators to understand how to work effectively with the existing norms, not for project operators to contort themselves into whatever chimera is expected of them by drive-by patchmakers.

by timhh 3y ago

stevemk14ebr 3y ago

None of those responses were at all hostile

lukan 3y ago
He probably means this: "It's rarely a good idea to jump in and start a big refactor of someone else's library without first discussing the direction you're going in." But I agree, not hostile, just unwilling to do something, he does not want to do. Even if the other one already put work in it.
- timhh 3y ago
  Yes it's unsolicited "advice" that shows an uncooperative attitude IMO. You can say "I don't want to do that" in a nice way without being patronising. If you look at the other closed MRs you'll see a similar attitude. E.g. here (I'd forgotten about this actually): https://github.com/lezer-parser/generator/pull/6#issuecomment-892007596 https://github.com/lezer-parser/generator/pull/6#issuecommen... Here https://github.com/lezer-parser/lr/pull/64#issuecomment-1802218165 https://github.com/lezer-parser/lr/pull/64#issuecomment-1802... It's nothing major but just emanates "difficult to work with" vibes so I didn't want to spend my time working with a project like that (looks like not many other people do either).
  - lukan 3y ago
    Well yes, he does not want to discuss the direction of developement. He decides that. If he thinks something is not helping, he won't do it. So sure, taking part in the project would mean accepting his way of things. So difficult to work with? Depends on your expectations I guess. And the comment above could have been maybe written nicer, but I see it as a defense of "no, I don't need to accept your PR just because you put work in it, you should have checked with me first, before doing it" Because he had those discussions quite often I think (I follow decelopement from time to time since quite a while)
    - timhh 3y ago
      > no, I don't need to accept your PR just because you put work in it, you should have checked with me first, before doing it Which is a bit rude IMO, and not really in the spirit of open source. I never demanded that he accept it. A PR is like "here's some code, let me know if it's ok" not "you should merge this code without question". Here is what I would have written: "Hi, thanks for the code but I don't think I want to go in that direction because X Y Z." (he didn't give any clear reasons so you'll have to imagine those). Anyway he's free to do his thing. I was just explaining why I moved away from that library.
      - lukan 3y ago
        "Which is a bit rude IMO, and not really in the spirit of open source. I never demanded that he accept it. " Other people did before you. But I can see how you perceived that reaction to you as hostile. It was definitely a bit rude. I disagree a bit though, that it is not in the spirit of open source. Open source does not necessarily mean open for collaboration. He does accept PRs, if they fit his vision .. and get defensive, when they don't, because he don't want to spend energy arguing why not. He does not have to. So yes, it would be nicer, if he would be nicer. But he is the way he is and still he managed to build a great open source product.
  - rokkitmensch 3y ago
    The onus when working on an existing project is for new collaborators to understand how to work effectively with the existing norms, not for project operators to contort themselves into whatever chimera is expected of them by drive-by patchmakers.