4 ms·
> My experience is now much buggier, slower You'll have to file a bug report, because none of the built-in LSP stuff should cause any performance degradation.
by mjlbach 4y ago
> My experience is now much buggier, slower
You'll have to file a bug report, because none of the built-in LSP stuff should cause any performance degradation.
> syntax highlighting just stops working randomly
This has nothing to do with LSP.
> files get spewn all over my repositories that I have to .git/info/exclude
Neovim does not automatically create files in your repositories.
- junon 4y ago> You'll have to file a bug report, because none of the built-in LSP stuff should cause any performance degradation. That's a bold claim. Migrating from NCM + clangd integration is absolutely slower. > This has nothing to do with LSP. Sorry, you're right. Tree-sitter-based syntax highlighting is buggy and slow. My point still stands. > Neovim does not automatically create files in your repositories. No, you're right. Clangd does. I was commenting more on my experience, less Neovim's LSP behavior specifically.
- mjlbach 4y ago> That's a bold claim. Migrating from NCM + clangd integration is absolutely slower. You'll have to define slower (time to diagnostics, time to completion, are you really talking about the performance of nvim-cmp instead, etc.) preferably in a bug report with benchmarks. I've done several rounds of performance optimization since 0.5, and I haven't heard any complaints since 0.6 when I swapped out our json decoder.
- davidatbu 4y agoI would just back up @mjlbach here, and provide my datapoint as a neovim user: I have no complaints with regards to neovim's builtin LSP client, especially with regards speed.