Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

improvement: Don't fail on refreshing semantic tokens #5237

Merged
merged 1 commit into from May 18, 2023
Merged

improvement: Don't fail on refreshing semantic tokens #5237

merged 1 commit into from May 18, 2023

Conversation

tgodzik
Copy link
Contributor

@tgodzik tgodzik commented May 17, 2023

Connected to #5193

  1. We don't refresh tokens if they are not enabled
  2. We ignore the exception in refreshSemanticTokens since it might cause the server not to init (not exactly sure which flow)

@tgodzik tgodzik mentioned this pull request May 17, 2023
Closed
@tgodzik
improvement: Don't fail on refreshing semantic tokens
c94fa83 
Connected to scalameta#5193

1. We don't refresh tokens if they are not enabled
2. We ignore the exception in refreshSemanticTokens since it might cause the server not to init (not exactly sure which flow)
ckipp01
ckipp01 approved these changes May 18, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@ckipp01 ckipp01 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this should be fine although I haven't been able to reproduce the original issue for this.

LGTM

@tgodzik tgodzik merged commit 4d5f3c7 into scalameta:main May 18, 2023
22 checks passed
@tgodzik tgodzik deleted the refresh-semantic-tokens branch May 18, 2023 08:48
@kasiaMarek
Copy link
Contributor

Wait, really? Doing .handle((msg, ex) => null) seems a bit desperate. Shouldn't we at least log something there?

@tgodzik
Copy link
Contributor Author

tgodzik commented May 18, 2023

Wait, really? Doing .handle((msg, ex) => null) seems a bit desperate. Shouldn't we at least log something there?

I might have got a bit lazy here 😅 -> #5239

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@ckipp01 ckipp01 ckipp01 approved these changes

@kasiaMarek kasiaMarek Awaiting requested review from kasiaMarek

@jkciesluk jkciesluk Awaiting requested review from jkciesluk

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
3 participants
@tgodzik @kasiaMarek @ckipp01