Shouldn't we steal treesitter textobjects from the neovim plugin?

[k2d222]

The popular neovim plugin nvim-treesitter-textobjects has textobjects queries mostly compatible with helix's (see https://github.com/nvim-treesitter/nvim-treesitter-textobjects/tree/master/queries).

Only difference is helix uses inside and around instead of inner and outer. Replacing those, they seem to work properly (I tested js/ts and ocaml). And they are more detailed, paving the way for eventual extensions. Would make sense to use those and not reinvent the wheel.

I could be missing a licence issue? I don't know much about that.

note: If we do use those queries, I believe it would be more clever to adapt our syntax to use inner and outer as I believe it is in our interest to follow "standards" when it doesn't cost anything.

[dead10ck]

It's my understanding that many of the queries in helix are based on these ones, because like you said, why reinvent the wheel. I think the reason we don't just reuse the repo outright is because of the capture name differences, and also I believe the order of precedence is backwards in neovim: tree-sitter and helix favor mosr recent first, and neovim prefers the first definition. This leads to some incorrect highlighting without fixing.