You could say that about free text too. You and I could edit the same word and then have a semantic conflict. Arguably the situation with code is better since some things like tests are less likely to conflict so you can have automated flagging of spots that have caused problems.
> You could say that about free text too.
Not only can, but did: about 15 minutes ago in another subthread under this submission.
Re:Where is the CRDT for syntax trees
by speed_spread on Friday December 03, 2021 @08:01PM
(#29437619)
Would it be possible to design a constrained syntax that would guarantee mergeability while preserving decent expressivity?
It seems instantly obvious to me (which is a disclaimer encouraging you to be suspicious) that the answer is: exactly nowhere. Syntax trees have conflicts.
If you and I have the same syntax tree, and then change the syntax independently, the results have to be merged, which may be semantically impossible.
The kinds of operations you'd like to have on a syntax tree data type are not conflict-free.