4 ms·
Makes me so sad that I can't just code up a parser and have a useable language. I have a lot of ideas, but heck, just syntax highlighting is... I don't know whe
by erhaetherth 3y ago
Makes me so sad that I can't just code up a parser and have a useable language. I have a lot of ideas, but heck, just syntax highlighting is... I don't know where to begin. And auto-completions. I need a tool that does 90% of that like PegJS or other parser-generators do for the parsing part. Don't see why a parser-generator can't also spit out an LSP. And if it knows what tokens are valid next, it should be able to generate completion suggestions. And if you have an AST, you can probably format the code half decently. And then I imagine it's possible to have a semi-universal package manager, I don't know why we need one per language, really. Aren't they all "put some code in some predefined location, and resolve these dependencies with semver please"? Maybe some extra junk for precompiled deps but still.
- aldanor 3y agoBecause LSP is not just "give me some semi-decent completions based on parsing tokens in this file". Proper LSP will treat code semantically, in case of e.g. Rust it may complete a method name from a trait method because you have the trait somewhere in scope, which comes from a third-party package which the LSP also parses, where it needs to expand some procedural macros to get to source code, etc etc. We've been spoiled by good LSPs, perhaps. But again, it's not just "parse this file please".