Re: Adding support for xref jumping to headers/interfaces

[Spencer Baugh]

João Távora <joaotavora@gmail.com> writes:

> On Wed, Nov 8, 2023, 16:40 Spencer Baugh <sbaugh@janestreet.com> wrote:
>
>  João Távora <joaotavora@gmail.com> writes:
>  > On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 11:18 PM Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru> wrote:
>  >> What I meant is, using it with the Elisp implementation didn't
>  >> convince me of the usefulness of the feature. Perhaps you disagree?
>  >>
>  >> Or it would be nice to hear from someone who have tried out Eglot's
>  >> integration and found more upsides there.
>  >
>  > If you want that to happen, the only realistic way to have good
>  > feedback from anyone else other than emacs-devel nerds like me and you
>  > is to release an Eglot version with  this feature, which we can change
>  > later (even non-backward-compatibly, within a reasonable time frame).
>
>  I tried the Eglot integration, my comments elsewhere are inspired by
>  that.
>
> Can you point me to this "elsewhere"?

Elsewhere in this thread - my message on Tue, 07 Nov 2023 11:51:49 -0500

>  I found it rather clumsy out of the box. 
>
> What exactly is clumsy? Please state the command you used and what the clumsy 
> effects were. 

Specifically xref-find-extras is clumsy, because it's annoying to have
to type the full "kind" in to request a specific "kind" of definition.

eglot-find-{declaration,implementation,typeDefinition} is good as
always.

>  However, it works well with an
>  approach of adding bindings for individual kinds, as is currently how I
>  (and other Eglot users at Jane Street, and presumably most other Eglot
>  users everywhere) use Eglot.  So that compatibility with an
>  already-common approach is an upside of this integration.
>
> Bindings to what commands exactly?

eglot-find-{declaration,implementation,typeDefinition}

>  However, the alternative UI which shows all kinds of definitions in a
>  single buffer does not exist for Eglot in the same way it exists for
>  Elisp.  So... I can't really compare it to that.
>
> What "alternative UI" are you talking about exactly? How can I trigger it for 
> Elisp? Please give a full example as I don't know what
> you are taking about.

In Elisp, M-. (xref-find-definitions) already shows all the kinds of
definitions that are requestable through xref-find-extras.  But there's
no similar way to show all kinds of definitions for Eglot - M-. only
includes the proper definition, not the declaration and typeDefinition
and so on.

I know you would prefer not to implement such a thing, I'm just
explaining for Dmitry that since this kind of UI doesn't exist, I can't
compare xref-find-extras against that kind of UI for Eglot in the same
way that I can with Elisp.