rust-lang / cargo

The Rust package manager
https://doc.rust-lang.org/cargo
Apache License 2.0
12.77k stars 2.42k forks source link

Proposal: Better shell completions #6645

Open ehuss opened 5 years ago

ehuss commented 5 years ago

This is a proposal to add better shell completion support to Cargo. The outline of the strategy is:

Benefits:

Drawbacks:

Please let me know if you have any thoughts or objections.

nrc commented 5 years ago

cargo completions <shell> will output a completion script for the given shell (bash, zsh, etc.)

I don't know how this works at all, but why do some tool's shell completions just work (e.g., Git) whereas the Rust tools seem to need some kind of opt-in step? Of course, I think it would be nice if we didn't need this opt-in step.

ehuss commented 5 years ago

didn't need this opt-in step

It depends on how rust/cargo is installed. Some installers (like ubuntu) will automatically add the completion file to the global location (such as /usr/share/bash-completion/completions/) and it will "just work" assuming your shell is configured to load them. rustup does not do that, since it avoids touching files outside of the user's home directory. rustup could install them in the user's home directory ($XDG_DATA_HOME/bash-completion/completions, and probably something similar for other shells). That would need to be a decision for rustup to make, if it is acceptable to dump files in various locations.

jpalomaki commented 5 years ago

FWIW, I just started learning Rust (cargo), using rustup, and this was pretty much the first thing I hit. :smile:

If we want to keep stuff in the user's home directory (as opposed to e.g. /etc/bash_completion.d), one way to do this (for bash) is:

echo 'source <(cargo completion bash)' >> ~/.bashrc

I use said approach with kubectl: https://kubernetes.io/docs/tasks/tools/install-kubectl/#enabling-shell-autocompletion

scooter-dangle commented 5 years ago

@ehuss, had you considered looking at how to include something like this in clap (or as an add-on to clap) rather than directly in cargo?

ehuss commented 5 years ago

@scooter-dangle In a sense, it will be a clap addon, because it will probably be looking at the (hidden) clap internals to infer the options. My impression is that clap development has stalled and v3 has a long ways to go, so I don't think it is something we can use in the foreseeable future, and there's no indication how new features like this would make progress. There is an issue for this (https://github.com/clap-rs/clap/issues/810), but there's no sense from the issue if it will support custom extensions or how it will work.

andradei commented 5 years ago

I used rustup completions zsh cargo and it is not working. Thanks for the work on this.

Related issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rustup.rs/issues/1821

tesuji commented 5 years ago

See more:

pickfire commented 5 years ago

Is it possible to reduce cargo start time or optionally use generated completions as it is faster only a one-time cost?

ehuss commented 5 years ago

Is it possible to reduce cargo start time

I'm not sure what you mean here. Cargo should launch in about 25ms, depending on your system. I think that should be plenty fast for completion.

hsandt commented 4 years ago

As a workaround, for now I just added a symlink to the installed completions for my current toolchain, in my local completions. On Linux, stable toolchain:

$ ln -s ~/.rustup/toolchains/stable-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/etc/bash_completion.d/cargo ~/.local/share/bash-completion/completions/cargo

This will work for a specific toolchain, but the file seems to be a copy of cargo.bashcomp.sh, so I guess it doesn't matter too much.

petr-tik commented 3 years ago

I would like to add an enhancement to the original feature request.

Interactive fuzzy completions

I got this idea after writing custom fzf wrappers over cmake like this one: find all cmakelists in a project, grep all invocations of add_library and add_executable, pipe that to fzf, pipe the target selected by the user to cmake build.

Once I wrote this bash function, i could drop into any new cmake project, run my pt-build and have an interactive selector for the tests, libraries or executables that I might want to build.

since cargo already provides a uniform way to build any rust projects, I think it would be great to enable developers to interactively select the build target.

user story

cargo build --example <TAB><TAB>
# a fuzzy finder window appears with all buildable examples as defined in Cargo.toml or examples/

cargo build --bin i_already_know_the_name --features <TAB><TAB>
# a fuzzy finder window appears with all available features to complete

cargo bench <TAB><TAB>
# a fuzzy finder window with all benchmarks appears

Required building blocks

2 components are required - quickly producing a list of relevant targets (filtered by type) and exposing a fuzzy interface to the user.

Query cargo for all targets to complete with

Bazel and buck build systems have query subcommands that can produce lists of targets filtered by labels like build, test, bench. Cargo should be able to analyze the workspace and list: binary targets to pass to --bin example targets to pass to --example bench targets to pass to --bench

Add a fuzzy completion interface

The fzf-like rust crate is called skim and it provides us with the primitives to expose a fuzzy finder to the user.

https://github.com/lotabout/skim

Once this exists, the bash completion functions can call the corresponding cargo fuzzy-picker depending on the tokens already typed on the command line.

Prior Art/Other build systems

As i was writing this, I found this open feature request on the bazel repo. Great minds think alike! https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/issues/11644

Under-explored

Since cargo enables people to write their own plugins, like cargo fuzz, the target types defined by those need to be made available to original cargo, so they can be listed as completion options. I am not sure how that would work.

hitzhangjie commented 3 years ago

If cargo support this, it would be better.

ps: as a gopher, I have used https://github.com/spf13/cobra to build command line tools for a long time, which provides a basic support for generating completion script for bash, zsh, powershell, etc.

It works like ./myapp completion bash > .bash_myapp and add source ~/.bash_myapp into .bashrc.

scooter-dangle commented 3 years ago

If cargo support this, it would be better.

ps: as a gopher, I have used https://github.com/spf13/cobra to build command line too for a long time, which provides a basic support for generating completion script for bash, zsh, powershell, etc.

It works like ./myapp completion bash > .bash_myapp and add source ~/.bash_myapp into .bashrc.

FYI: Clap generates completions like that (App::gen_completions_to), but the application needs to expose it. E.g., here's how starship does that.

epage commented 2 years ago

Relevant clap issues:

simbleau commented 2 years ago

It seems weirdly inconsistent that rustup completions <bash/zsh/...> is a thing, but cargo completions bash isn't a thing.

For those arriving in the future, the work around to enable these manually (Tested Ubuntu 22.04/20.04) is: cat $(rustc --print sysroot)/etc/bash_completion.d/cargo > ~/.local/share/bash-completion/completions/cargo

bjorn3 commented 10 months ago

How will this handle security with respect to path specifications in rust-toolchain.toml? It would be pretty bad if doing a cargo command completion inside a malicious repo would cause arbitrary code execution. And even for a non-malicious repo have to wait for rustup to download the toolchain if it isn't already when trying to get completions is annoying. Will the shell completions ensure that they invoke the cargo from which they were generated without going through the rustup wrapper?

epage commented 10 months ago

I don't think that will be a change from the status quo. The existing completions may call cargo or rustup, depending on the argument.

weihanglo commented 4 months ago

14084 proposes an idea that the completion script could learn available learn options from .cargo/config.toml. We might want to consider that when generating completion scripts as well.

Rudxain commented 4 months ago

learn options from .cargo/config.toml

Does that include aliases? It would be convenient if completions were alias-aware

epage commented 4 months ago

I'd like to be alias-aware but not going to block the work on it as it adds a lot of extra complexity to clap_complete as we now need cargo to interject itself directly into the parsing process.