-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 889
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Extend lsp-mode to provide option to register action handlers #328
Conversation
IMO, url handlers can be handled/registered better by a LSP client in the |
Hi @vibhavp , Thanks for the feedback! I am a bit confused, I tried to follow the patters established by the lsp-mode, e. g. both notification-handlers and request-handlers have corresponding register method and I tried to make it as consistent as possible. Are you planning to move both to the define client macros as well? |
Yeah, this was on the incorrect issue. Regardless, does the specification allow code actions to be executed by the client? |
From the spec: "The protocol currently doesn’t specify a set of well-known commands. So executing a command requires some tool extension code." |
lsp-methods.el
Outdated
;; can be used in `lsp-execute-code-action' to determine whether the action | ||
;; current client is interested in executing the action instead of sending it | ||
;; to the server. | ||
(action-handlers (make-hash-table :test 'equal) :read-only t) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could you make this the last field of the struct? Otherwise, we'd be unnecessarily breaking binary compatibility.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sure, I didn't know that this will have an effect on binary compatibility, thanks!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Comment addressed with 8f07c98
Merging for now, as all documentation for code actions I could find is still ambiguous. |
…#331) * Add +swbt none to remove busy-wait and improve performance Utilizing busy-wait to reduce latency primarily makes sense for applications that are running as the only node on the machine. So it doesn't make sense for ElixirLS because there will usually be other processes running on the machine such as the editor and potentially other ElixirLS instances. A blog post that touches on `+swbt none`: https://www.ably.io/blog/beam-optimization-mqtt/ Also add sbwtdcpu and sbwtdio Fixes emacs-lsp#328 * Add +sbwt none to .bat files also * Update changelog
Fixes #309