[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#74612: 30.0.90; [PATCH] Allow passing nil to treesit-node-match-p
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#74612: 30.0.90; [PATCH] Allow passing nil to treesit-node-match-p |
Date: |
Sun, 01 Dec 2024 11:59:58 +0200 |
> From: Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2024 00:31:05 -0800
> Cc: 74612@debbugs.gnu.org
>
>
>
> > On Nov 29, 2024, at 11:22 PM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com>
> >> Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2024 16:38:22 -0800
> >>
> >> Eli, are you ok with this patch on emacs-30? Almost all tree-sitter node
> >> functions allows user to pass nil for NODE, so treesit-node-match-p should
> >> too.
> >
> > Does this solve an actual problem you've seen somewhere (and if so,
> > which problem), or does it solve a potential problem that didn't
> > actually happen yet?
>
> I encountered this problem (more like an inconvenience, since without this
> feature I’d need to test for nullness before passing a node to
> treesit-node-match-p) when using treesit-node-match-p for some new code I’m
> writing for master branch. Since (treesit-node-match-p node “type name”) is
> easier to write and shorter than (equal (treesit-node-type node) “type name”)
> or (string-match-p “type name regex” (treesit-node-type node)), I’ve been
> using it liberally in new code :)
>
> >
> > Also, does CHECK_TS_NODE allow nil or does it currently signal an
> > error?
>
> CHECK_TS_NODE currently signals an error. All the tree-sitter node functions
> that accepts nil has the "if (NILP (node)) return Qnil” line before
> CHECK_TS_NODE (or treesit_check_node)
>
> If you’re not too comfortable with the change, we can apply it to master. It
> wouldn’t create any backward-incompatibility since this change makes
> treesit-node-match-p more lenient on its argument, not stricter. The drawback
> is treesit-node-match-p will be a bit more annoying to use.
OK, please install on emacs-30, and thanks.