Tree-sitter Go port
Shares rank 6 of 7 parser libraries by recommenders
Recommended for a pure-Go tree-sitter runtime that reportedly speeds syntax highlighting about 20x over regexps; critics question its test coverage and say the readme looks LLM-generated.
Recommended for a pure-Go tree-sitter runtime that reportedly speeds syntax highlighting about 20x over regexps; critics question its test coverage and say the readme looks LLM-generated.
9 people gave an opinion
- recommend it
- 5
- criticize it
- 4
- approval share
- 56%
Recommended in 1 of 13 months
- November 2025: not recommended
- December 2025: not recommended
- January 2026: not recommended
- February 2026: recommended
- March 2026: not recommended
- April 2026: not recommended
- May 2026: not recommended
- June 2026: not recommended
- July 2026: not recommended
- August 2026: not recommended
- September 2026: not recommended
- October 2026: not recommended
- November 2026: not recommended (month in progress)
Why it doesn’t carry the badge
- 5 people recommend itNeeds 10 or more, not met.
- 1.2 recommenders for every criticNeeds 2 to 1 or better, not met.
- Recommended in 1 of 13 monthsNeeds 4 or more, not met.
The same three rules apply to every product, and the badge can’t be bought. How the badge works
What people say about it
The reasons people give, with the number of comments that give each one. Open a reason to read what they said.
Why people recommend it
Each mark is one comment
Fills a need people had
“This is great, I was looking for something like this, thanks for making this!”
Comment from 25 Feb 2026 in “Show HN: I ported Tree-sitter to Go” “i built this precisely for folks like yourself with this specific pain”
Comment from 25 Feb 2026 in “Show HN: I ported Tree-sitter to Go”
What people warn about
Each mark is one comment
Looks LLM-generated or vibe-coded
“Why would we do that if it's obviously vibed?”
Comment from 25 Feb 2026 in “Show HN: I ported Tree-sitter to Go” “The readme is obvious LLM slop.”
Comment from 25 Feb 2026 in “Show HN: I ported Tree-sitter to Go”
Other parser libraries people recommend
The four most recommended other parser libraries, with the same counts for each, so you can compare like for like. The tick on each bar marks the 2 to 1 line the badge needs.
| Product | Recommend | Criticize | Approval | Months | Owned | Badge |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tree-sitter | 79 | 15 | 84% | 12 | — | Approved |
| Hardwood Parquet parser | 7 | 0 | 100% | 2 | — | — |
| Lark parser library for Python | 6 | 1 | 86% | 5 | — | — |
| Kaitai Struct | 6 | 2 | 75% | 5 | — | — |
| Tree-sitter Go portThis page | 5 | 4 | 56% | 1 | — | — |
What people said
All 10 comments that mention it, newest first. Each links to the original comment.
“Ideally the author would disclose how much of the tree-sitter test suite passes.”
“Initialy tests show a 20x increase in syntax highlighting speed compared to the previous regexp-based approach.”
“Why would we do that if it's obviously vibed?”
“So your no-op benchmark is just the time it takes for cgo to function.”
“The readme is obvious LLM slop.”
“Why do you have a parsing mode that guarantees incorrect outputs on some grammars”
“This is great, I was looking for something like this, thanks for making this!”
“If all the languages together add up to 15MB that is a game changer for me.”
“i built this precisely for folks like yourself with this specific pain”
“Oh this is really neat for the Bazel community”
Counts come from 1,795,640 Hacker News comments, November 2025 to November 2026. How we count. Report a mistake.