Closed laralove143 closed 2 years ago
Right on! We should definitely add Clippy.
I'm thinking #6 will be the last feature I add before shipping Version 1. I want to get the current feature set out there and make sure there aren't major bugs before adding additional features. This will make a nice addition for v2.
yes i agree! we definitely need some testing before publishing it. guess i’ll just use it as my daily driver
Would you accept a PR adding this feature (with a bit more flexibility than described here, which is similar to how the Rust Analyzer VS Code extension does it)?
Could you tell me a bit more about what you're thinking, and how it's more flexible? I'd love to hear your ideas!
It sounds to me like a user preference to select either "check" or "clippy" as the command to run to surface issues. I actually always ran clippy after fixing compiler errors, so I didn't realize it includes compiler errors in its output – and thus adding it would be so darn simple. Thanks for getting me to dig into this!
If my understanding is correct, then I could add the above change quickly. Or, if you'd really like to create a PR, then I'm happy to let you go ahead. (Please do check the contributing guidelines)
It sounds to me like a user preference to select either "check" or "clippy" as the command to run to surface issues.
This was basically what I was thinking, except Rust Analyzer's VS Code extension has this configurable by a string as opposed to a preset list of options (hence the point I made about flexibility).
Preference added in extension version 2.0, which requires Nova 9 (released today). It can be adjusted per project.
I kept the preference as a radio selection instead of an open field. I believe this makes options more discoverable for newer users of Rust. If there are other commands I should add for save checks, please open a new issue!
it should work the same way, the issue parser already works with the json spec