Open xvw opened 1 month ago
Changes Missing Coverage | Covered Lines | Changed/Added Lines | % | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ocaml-lsp-server/src/custom_requests/req_construct.ml | 31 | 44 | 70.45% | ||
<!-- | Total: | 31 | 44 | 70.45% | --> |
Totals | |
---|---|
Change from base Build 4483: | 0.08% |
Covered Lines: | 5556 |
Relevant Lines: | 25435 |
When you say "can be useful", do you mean you have a concrete user in mind? Perhaps a client where you are planning to use this.
When you say "can be useful", do you mean you have a concrete user in mind? Perhaps a client where you are planning to use this.
Using Lsp through Emacs (that does not rely to much on hover and interactivy on top of mouse) can make the usage of construct
cumbersome so I'll probably rely on a custom request to use it when I'll move to emacs + lsp (instead of emacs + merlin).
I don't doubt the potential. What I'm saying is that until some client actually demonstrates real intention in using your custom request, you're just adding dead code. In the lsp standard itself, there's a requirement to demonstrate at least one client implementation for every additional protocol extension. We don't have to go that far, but how about we at least get some feedback from at least one actual client developer that is going to use this custom request before jump the gun.
@rgrinberg We expect different clients to use that query:
Okay, so what I'm getting is that the only client developer we need to consider is from JS. So let's have somebody from there have a look at this request to do a sanity check.
cc @awilliambauer
At the moment, construct is a completion hook, and in some cases accessing it via a one-off query can be useful.