6 ms·

Generally it's because Coc has completion, snippets, and pretty much everything from the regular VSCode version of the extension built-in, so Coc can replace mu

by jswny 6y ago

Generally it's because Coc has completion, snippets, and pretty much everything from the regular VSCode version of the extension built-in, so Coc can replace multiple plugins, and it works very well.

gen220 6y ago
Right, but Ale does this too (replace multiple plugins, supports completion, linting/formatting). Is it that coc.vim doesn't make you install the binaries of the tools (i.e. go-pls, python-language-server, clangd)? If so, that would be enough to explain the popularity to me. IMO, one could make the argument that it's somewhat antithetical to vim-culture, to not understand the non-vim binaries your editor is executing.
- colordrops 6y ago
  Do you understand how Ale works? I use Vim not for philosophical or cultural reasons but because I enjoy the UX. CoC's autocompletion is much more advanced than Ale. I used Ale for years.
  - gen220 6y ago
    > CoC's autocompletion is much more advanced than Ale I thought that both are pass-throughs to other completion engines, so isn't this a moot comparison? (maybe coc integrates the completion engine, but it doesn't implement a new one, right?). I use deoplete, but I'm not married to it (it's kind of slow when you have a big file). let g:deoplete#enable_at_startup = 1 call deoplete#custom#option({ \'auto_complete_delay': 1000, \'sources': { \ '_': ['ale', 'buffer'], \ 'py': ['ale'], \} \}) If so, isn't the completion experience is strictly a function of the completion engine you're passing coc/ale into (ux), and the binaries that you're passing into coc/ale (completion options)?
    - colordrops 6y ago
      CoC is built around the Microsoft Language Server. I wasn't able to get LSP working with Ale but perhaps things have changed since I switched.
      - vyskocilm 6y ago
        Microsoft Language Server is a protocol. It's up to each language to have own , blessed implementation like clangd, solargraph, or gopls. The beauty of ale plugin is that it supports almost anything from scratch and as I work on a multi language projects all the time it rocks everywhere. Do you have prettier installed? Boom all your JS files are checked. Do you have gopls, gofmt, goimports? Then yeah, you can use all of those from your editor. And so on. I am usually surprised how many linters it supports. Recently I got hints when editing protobuf file. Did not expected it. It is possible that coc.vim can do better. But I can't imagine how much better it should have be.
        saagarjha 6y ago
        Note that clangd is not a "blessed" implementation of a language server–there are others.
        gen220 6y ago
        > The beauty of ale plugin is that it supports almost anything from scratch this has been my experience too. I was editing some prolog the other day, `:ALEInfo` recommended swipl. worked like a charm! the linters covered are quite incredible: https://github.com/dense-analysis/ale/tree/master/ale_linters https://github.com/dense-analysis/ale/tree/master/ale_linter.... And if you read each integration file, they are quite small and comprehensible. I've never needed to add one myself, but I feel like I could if I wanted to.
        nikki93 6y ago
        coc.nvim does a lot more than linting. I know ale tries to do completion but in practice I just found the experience of using coc to be really good. It's a bunch of little things that add up. Not sure what best way to convey it -- maybe a gif? Haha. I included an example screenshot of hover type info for example. Super useful esp. as languages like C++ and Go and TypeScript have type deduction/inference. I just put cursor on a symbol and do ';h' to get type info and maybe docs. And so on and so forth.
- nikki93 6y ago
  One thing I really like in coc is I can ask to describe a symbol and it'll tell me about it in a hover thing: https://i.imgur.com/NrH0Wwz.png https://i.imgur.com/NrH0Wwz.png Do agree that coc is probably the least 'vim-culture'-ey part of such a setup, but hey it does good things. :) I don't think you need to justify using Ale so hard and put coc down, could just use whichever you prefer personally.
  - gen220 6y ago
    Sorry if I came across that way. Agree people should use the things they prefer. :) I'm trying to see if I'm missing something big/obvious, since coc.vim has been so popular recently.
    - nikki93 6y ago
      No worries! And yeah I went through a phase a few months ago of trying out the completion packages again, it's worth just trying and seeing if you like it. Here's the relevant bits of my config if that helps: https://gist.github.com/nikki93/6ea403d3e2cbff2b3d32d4528edf5ee5 https://gist.github.com/nikki93/6ea403d3e2cbff2b3d32d4528edf... coc.nvim has pretty much worked pretty well out of the box for many languages, and it works for me on macOS, Linux and Windows.

by jswny 6y ago

Generally it's because Coc has completion, snippets, and pretty much everything from the regular VSCode version of the extension built-in, so Coc can replace multiple plugins, and it works very well.

gen220 6y ago

Right, but Ale does this too (replace multiple plugins, supports completion, linting/formatting). Is it that coc.vim doesn't make you install the binaries of the tools (i.e. go-pls, python-language-server, clangd)? If so, that would be enough to explain the popularity to me. IMO, one could make the argument that it's somewhat antithetical to vim-culture, to not understand the non-vim binaries your editor is executing.

colordrops 6y ago
Do you understand how Ale works? I use Vim not for philosophical or cultural reasons but because I enjoy the UX. CoC's autocompletion is much more advanced than Ale. I used Ale for years.
- gen220 6y ago
  > CoC's autocompletion is much more advanced than Ale I thought that both are pass-throughs to other completion engines, so isn't this a moot comparison? (maybe coc integrates the completion engine, but it doesn't implement a new one, right?). I use deoplete, but I'm not married to it (it's kind of slow when you have a big file). let g:deoplete#enable_at_startup = 1 call deoplete#custom#option({ \'auto_complete_delay': 1000, \'sources': { \ '_': ['ale', 'buffer'], \ 'py': ['ale'], \} \}) If so, isn't the completion experience is strictly a function of the completion engine you're passing coc/ale into (ux), and the binaries that you're passing into coc/ale (completion options)?
  - colordrops 6y ago
    CoC is built around the Microsoft Language Server. I wasn't able to get LSP working with Ale but perhaps things have changed since I switched.
    - vyskocilm 6y ago
      Microsoft Language Server is a protocol. It's up to each language to have own , blessed implementation like clangd, solargraph, or gopls. The beauty of ale plugin is that it supports almost anything from scratch and as I work on a multi language projects all the time it rocks everywhere. Do you have prettier installed? Boom all your JS files are checked. Do you have gopls, gofmt, goimports? Then yeah, you can use all of those from your editor. And so on. I am usually surprised how many linters it supports. Recently I got hints when editing protobuf file. Did not expected it. It is possible that coc.vim can do better. But I can't imagine how much better it should have be.
      - saagarjha 6y ago
        Note that clangd is not a "blessed" implementation of a language server–there are others.
      - gen220 6y ago
        > The beauty of ale plugin is that it supports almost anything from scratch this has been my experience too. I was editing some prolog the other day, `:ALEInfo` recommended swipl. worked like a charm! the linters covered are quite incredible: https://github.com/dense-analysis/ale/tree/master/ale_linters https://github.com/dense-analysis/ale/tree/master/ale_linter.... And if you read each integration file, they are quite small and comprehensible. I've never needed to add one myself, but I feel like I could if I wanted to.
        nikki93 6y ago
        coc.nvim does a lot more than linting. I know ale tries to do completion but in practice I just found the experience of using coc to be really good. It's a bunch of little things that add up. Not sure what best way to convey it -- maybe a gif? Haha. I included an example screenshot of hover type info for example. Super useful esp. as languages like C++ and Go and TypeScript have type deduction/inference. I just put cursor on a symbol and do ';h' to get type info and maybe docs. And so on and so forth.
nikki93 6y ago
One thing I really like in coc is I can ask to describe a symbol and it'll tell me about it in a hover thing: https://i.imgur.com/NrH0Wwz.png https://i.imgur.com/NrH0Wwz.png Do agree that coc is probably the least 'vim-culture'-ey part of such a setup, but hey it does good things. :) I don't think you need to justify using Ale so hard and put coc down, could just use whichever you prefer personally.
- gen220 6y ago
  Sorry if I came across that way. Agree people should use the things they prefer. :) I'm trying to see if I'm missing something big/obvious, since coc.vim has been so popular recently.
  - nikki93 6y ago
    No worries! And yeah I went through a phase a few months ago of trying out the completion packages again, it's worth just trying and seeing if you like it. Here's the relevant bits of my config if that helps: https://gist.github.com/nikki93/6ea403d3e2cbff2b3d32d4528edf5ee5 https://gist.github.com/nikki93/6ea403d3e2cbff2b3d32d4528edf... coc.nvim has pretty much worked pretty well out of the box for many languages, and it works for me on macOS, Linux and Windows.