[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: PL support
From: |
Dmitry Gutov |
Subject: |
Re: PL support |
Date: |
Sat, 9 May 2020 21:44:56 +0300 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 |
On 09.05.2020 21:19, João Távora wrote:
Not many immediate "killer" advantages, Yuan Fu, but:
- eglot.el would be simplified, tho maybe only slightly. That is good.
Splitting a program would simplify it? I'm somewhat skeptical so far.
- language specific quirks (that do exist despite LSP) would be dealt
with in the corresponding mode, not Eglot, by using Eglot's
existing interfaces.
That sounds fine, but then you'd have to convince major mode authors to
set these settings. And educate them on what values they should use.
Considering you likely know more about C/C++ LSP servers than Alan, for
example, that doesn't sound productive. And python-mode is
unmaintained... js-mode hasn't seen a lot of dedicated development
either. You get my drift.
- Eglot could grow _more_ programmatic interfaces for that
to happen. It doesn't have them because it's the chicken and
the egg.
We'll have to discuss those.
- More importantly, many bugs that target Eglot's UI but are actually
Emacs's would come here. Discussing them in Github and hailing (mostly)
Stefan and Dmitry there works, sort of, but it would be better if we
used the
Emacs bug tracker (yes I know there are strong opinions on this). But at
the very least people like Eli and Richard would be able to participate
regularly in those discussions, and provide insight that just doesn't
reach the Github-sphere.
Umm. As a person with a fairly opinionated approach to package
development yourself, I think you might underestimate certain downsides
in sharing this responsibility like that.
And it doesn't look like Eli and Richard have a lot of free time to get
into the particulars, or fix Eglot's bugs. I don't either (so far).
Let me give you an example: didn't your eglot-box thing end up being
an eldoc-box instead? It should be in eldoc.el, it's a pretty good idea!
Well if eglot was in the core, you'd just automatically do it for eldoc.el
and get help on how to do it from seasoned Elispers who hang around
here and not Github.
How would that help? Eldoc has a defined interface. If eglot-box could
be based on that, it could just be considered for contribution on its own.
- Re: PL support, (continued)
- Re: PL support, Dmitry Gutov, 2020/05/09
- Re: PL support, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/05/09
- Re: PL support, João Távora, 2020/05/09
- Re: PL support, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/05/09
- Re: PL support, João Távora, 2020/05/09
- Re: PL support, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/05/09
- Re: PL support, João Távora, 2020/05/09
- Re: PL support, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/05/09
- Re: PL support, Yuan Fu, 2020/05/09
- Re: PL support, João Távora, 2020/05/09
- Re: PL support,
Dmitry Gutov <=
- Re: PL support, João Távora, 2020/05/09
- Re: PL support, Dmitry Gutov, 2020/05/09
- Re: PL support, João Távora, 2020/05/09
- Re: PL support, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/05/09
- Re: PL support, Clément Pit-Claudel, 2020/05/09
- Re: PL support, João Távora, 2020/05/09
- Re: PL support, Dmitry Gutov, 2020/05/09
- Re: PL support, Clément Pit-Claudel, 2020/05/09
- Re: PL support, Dmitry Gutov, 2020/05/09
- Re: PL support, Clément Pit-Claudel, 2020/05/10