4 ms·
We aren't talking about autocompletion. The post upthread describes "the tools to ensure...data integrity": i.e. type system or static analysis features to prev
by pcwalton 9y ago
We aren't talking about autocompletion. The post upthread describes "the tools to ensure...data integrity": i.e. type system or static analysis features to prevent bugs.
That said, if you're trying to argue that autocompletion is more difficult to implement for Rust compared to Go because Go is simpler by some metric, then I disagree there too. Any static language (well, one that doesn't intertwine parsing and semantics like C++ does) can support autocompletion with comparable levels of implementation effort.
- e3b0c 9y agoThen I am curious about what makes RLS or the alike so hard to onboard? Common IDE features like reliable and responsive "jump to definition", "Find all references" and "Renaming symbols" are 90% of all I would ask for. Do Rust devs have less attention to the area?
- steveklabnik 9y agoThose three things already work in the RLS. And more: https://www.ncameron.org/blog/what-the-rls-can-do/ https://www.ncameron.org/blog/what-the-rls-can-do/
- mswift42 9y agoIs there an editor that supports jump to definition for macros?
- steveklabnik 9y agoI don't know. I have a hunch that lots of macros still will be better with the new macro system, but we'll see. Anyway, regardless, there's certainly more work to do! And it's being actively developed quite heavily. For example, it will be on stable Rust very soon.
- mswift42 9y agoThanks.