3 ms·

I've seen you post this criticism before, but the line "volunteers on GitHub" is pure FUD. Is the Eglot guy paid for writing Eglot, or he hosts somewhere else,

I've seen you post this criticism before, but the line "volunteers on GitHub" is pure FUD. Is the Eglot guy paid for writing Eglot, or he hosts somewhere else, so it's better? "The code is nowhere near as good" according to you? Give a concrete example of where the LSP code has real deficiencies; Eglot isn't as fully featured, is more opinionated, and its stans are more annoying. Sounds to me like the LSP project is helping new hackers learn Emacs, and Eglot is one bus accident from being unmaintained, frankly.

chlorion 4y ago
Yup, I have seen this person post something similar at least once before as well and it's pure misinformation at best. Both projects are very good and everyone should give both a shot and see which they prefer, but spreading misinformation about one project because you prefer another is stupid and childish. A quick peek at the github contributors insights also shows that the overwhelming majority of code is contributed by 3 people and not "volunteers on github", but even if it was mostly worked on by volunteers it would make no difference at all. Code quality is not something that can be trivially disproved like the volunteer thing, but as someone who has spent a bit of time poking around in both projects, neither look any better code quality wise to me. The main thing is that lsp-mode is just much, much larger and prefers to use non-native APIs and packages at times. This is purely a difference in style and opinion rather than "quality".