Syntax highlighting aborts on enter for commands

[mqudsi]

If you're in a laggy environment (in my case, connecting to a tmux session over ssh - albeit on the local network, but over wifi) and type faster than fish is processing things, an <enter> after a command appears to abort the syntax highlighting process.

In this example, I typed in make followed by <enter>:

Naturally, the command starts off as not found and in red (m, ma, mak) but is located and turned to the regular command color as the command (make) is entered. I am hitting <enter> before fish gets a chance to update that, and the highlighter continues to display it in red.

If I were to pause for 100-200ms after typing in make before hitting enter, this would not happen.

[faho]

type faster than fish is processing things, an after a command appears to abort the syntax highlighting process.

I'm assuming "enter" here sends \r or \n, and that that's bound to something that does execute. If so, then I'd say this is working correctly? Syntax highlighting is nice, but if it's taking a while it should be taking a back seat to, ya know, actually running stuff.

[mqudsi]

I logged this as I'm suspicious about the whole thing. It shouldn't take long at all for fish to ascertain that make is a command, and I find it extremely unlikely that it takes longer to do so (on an SSD) than it does for me to type in a character... unless the two characters were in a single transmission that was burst received? But the network delay means it's unlikely, as that would be the opposite transmission behavior that you'd expect.

If it is indeed the case, that makes sense. I still think the terminal history is a record of what transpired and the highlighter thread should continue in the background even after execution has begun (but that can be a can of worms if the already-printed text is cleared/modified/etc by the new program being executed, so never mind).

[ridiculousfish]

fish's normal syntax highlighting mode will check the filesystem to validate commands, underline paths, check redirections, etc.

It also has a zero-IO mode, which is invoked right before executing a command. In this mode all commands are assumed to be valid, intended to address exactly this issue.

So this is supposed to work, I'll investigate why it's not.

[ridiculousfish]

Ok, we don't invoke the no-io variant of highlighting on every execution, because if the command really is invalid then we'll color it valid before failing to execute it.

What happens here is that mak is an invalid command. When you type another character we extend it to make and propagate the last character's color (error), and then kick off highlighting in the background. Before that finishes, you press enter, and we don't wait around at that point.

Note that it is not trivial to verify that make is a valid command: first the function check (perhaps autoloading) fails, then we have to explore $PATH, then we have to ensure that this user has execute privileges for the file found in $PATH, etc.

I think the right thing to do is to wait for any outstanding background highlighting to complete, but with a timeout of a few ms.

[mamiu]

I think the right thing to do is to wait for any outstanding background highlighting to complete, but with a timeout of a few ms.

@ridiculousfish Is that already possible? And if so, how?

I'm happy to accept the validation time of the command to get syntax highlighting for this use case.

[ShizuhaAki]

I still don't find #7418 duplicate with this. If so, then the problem is not just "wait for the time that fish processes colors", it is a problem regarding the order in which fish does expansions and colors the output, and, generally, the order in which fish does other things.

[mamiu]

@Ravenclaw-OIer

I think your issue is indeed related to this one. And yes you're assumption that "it is a problem regarding the order in which fish does expansions and colors the output, and, generally, the order in which fish does other things" is absolutely correct.
See here: #3031

One quote from that thread:

I'm sure there's a good reason commandline -f is currently the way it is, but the current behaviour is very unintuitive and often stills surprises me when writing scripts (and I consider myself a relatively seasoned fish user).

As programmers, unless some sort of special syntax is involved, we're used to things being executed sequentially in scripting languages, and often taking effect immediately, which makes this particular nuance all the more surprising.