Support textDocument/formatting

[qbedard]

It looks like the only way to have ruff-lsp format a document right now is via a textDocument/codeAction. From my experience, most LSP servers allow document formatting via textDocument/formatting.

It took me a bit to realize, because the example Neovim config registers a keymap for vim.lsp.buf.format(), so I was a bit baffled trying to use that to format a file, as ruff-lsp does nothing when that request is issued right now.

[kalekseev]

Not sure what the convention for linter lsps and formatting command but at least something like RuffFixAll command would be helpful, this is how eslint do it https://github.com/neovim/nvim-lspconfig/blob/d005193b6476088ff032607baca07b1bbbeb36ee/lua/lspconfig/server_configurations/eslint.lua#L165

[kalekseev]

For example if someone setup null-ls with black and ruff-lsp that support formatting then he will need to control which lsp should handle formatting command https://github.com/jose-elias-alvarez/null-ls.nvim/wiki/Formatting-on-save#choosing-a-client-for-formatting

[charliermarsh]

We actually do support that -- it's used in the VS Code extension. So we support source.fixAll, source.fixAll.ruff, and a special ruff.applyAutofix. The latter has to be configured by clients though since it's a custom command, so I think it requires some configuration on a per-client basis? I'd love to see an example if someone can get it working in the Lua config.

[kalekseev]

I think RuffFixAll command should be added to the nvim-lspconfig see my link how eslint do this in nvim-lspconfig.

[Jackevansevo]

I'm still seeing this issue. Testing in neovim, using the configuration listed here: https://beta.ruff.rs/docs/editor-integrations/#language-server-protocol-official

Running

:lua vim.lsp.buf.format()

[LSP] Format request failed, no matching language servers

Can confirm this by querying the client capabilities itself (prints false)

local on_attach = function(client, bufnr)
    print(client.supports_method("textDocument/formatting"))
end

I can see 9f289ec got reverted, so unsure whether this is a config issue, or something that hasn't landed in main yet