cmp-buffer VS tree-sitter

sources = cmp.config.sources({ { name = "nvim_lsp", priority = 1, group_index = 1 }, { name = "luasnip" }, { group_index = 2, name = "buffer", priority = 5, option = { -- https://github.com/hrsh7th/cmp-buffer get_bufnrs = function() return vim.api.nvim_list_bufs() end, }, }, { name = "nvim_lsp_signature_help" }, { name = "path" }, }),

cmp-buffer: Completion source. It provides suggestions based on the current file.

Then what is the purpose of using cmp-buffer?

Okay I sat down and did exactly what I said in my previous comment. Essentially it's a complete rewrite of my old code that makes things much more generic and flexible. You can take a look at the PR here: https://github.com/hrsh7th/cmp-buffer/pull/60.

Good work but can you tell how is it different from https://github.com/hrsh7th/cmp-buffer

hrsh7th/cmp-buffer - nvim-cmp source for buffer words

cmp-buffer

nvim-cmp is just the autocompletion engine w/ fuzzy matching and other filtering options. To get items to be filled from cmp you will need sources, for example: hrsh7th/cmp-nvim-lsp plugin will provide items from a LSP server to cmp, so you can get items you can fuzzy match in. Another one is items from buffers: hrsh7th/cmp-buffer

I learned from a google search that these days upstream tree-sitter provides WebAssembly bindings.

Source: https://github.com/tree-sitter/tree-sitter/tree/master/lib/b...

NPM: https://www.npmjs.com/package/web-tree-sitter

Download from the latest Github release: js file (https://github.com/tree-sitter/tree-sitter/releases/download...) and wasm file (https://github.com/tree-sitter/tree-sitter/releases/download...)

Tree-sitter optimizes for performance (to use in editors), not for correctness. In fact even TS' core developers advocate for not bothering too much with correctness of grammars[1]. I imagine this constraint would be a deal-breaker for GitHub or anyone else in their position.

[1] https://github.com/tree-sitter/tree-sitter/issues/130#issuec...

This is a plugin that provides a simple way to use the tree-sitter in Neovim and also provides functionalities like highlighting, etc.

From the tree-sitter side, I am tracking https://github.com/tree-sitter/tree-sitter/issues/1942

Is tree-sitter really slower than TextMate grammars? Some benchmarks indicate that this isn't really the case [1]. On the other hand, breaking parse trees is a real issue, because the error-recovery in tree-sitter is pretty rudimentary [2][3], but as you said, it's not an issue for Shiki.

Several TextMate grammars suffer from inaccuracy bugs, and issues of maintainability. Perhaps the biggest hindrance in the adoption of tree-sitter, is that the most popular editor, VSCode, still doesn't support it.

[1]: https://github.com/microsoft/vscode/pull/161479

[2]: https://github.com/tree-sitter/tree-sitter/issues/1870

[3]: https://github.com/tree-sitter/tree-sitter/issues/224

u/lewis6991 I think the biggest performance gain was made by tree-sitter itself: https://github.com/tree-sitter/tree-sitter/pull/2085

I asked on the repo's discussions but responses are limited and not explanatory (I'm not shaming anyone here, discussions aren't a place for detailed how-tos and documentations anyway).

The following discussion here. TS query cannot be incremental, that is why I regard it as design fault.

Hi, so I've recently decided to give Neovim yet another try, this time using some predefined plugins with kickstart.nvim, for syntax it uses tree-sitter.