3 ms·

So renaming all the symbols in your whole project with just one command is not for you ? Navigating to declaration/searching all the usages of a symbol etc. All

So renaming all the symbols in your whole project with just one command is not for you ? Navigating to declaration/searching all the usages of a symbol etc. All that isn't for you ? And these are the two most basic features You make it sound like LSP is a small gimmick that appeals to less experienced developer while it's actually a huge productivity boost that has literally no link to being experienced or not.

nequo 3y ago
I also think that parent's comment is overly dismissive of LSP. But for me, Emacs with lsp-mode does the things that you describe.
- PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago
  I mean, I wanted to love LSP. Everything I read about it suggested that I would. But I tried it out for two weeks, working (as normal) on my 600k LOC C++ project, and found it somewhere between irritating and not-actually-helpful. I appreciate that people who started programming with such tools probably come to rely on it the way I rely on dynamic completion in emacs (which is a lot).
  - 59nadir 3y ago
    Considering C++ is almost impossible to write reliably good tools for it's entirely possible that LS for C++ is simply not very good and that with languages that can reliably provide a good LS experience you'd view this differently. I don't think it has anything to do with programming experience level. I've programmed for 24 years and I find language servers great when I can have them. 20 or so years on top of this is unlikely to change anything. For what it's worth I'd use CLion for C++, most likely, if I ever wanted to go back to C++ outside of tiny sandbox projects. P.S. Language servers are great for smaller ecosystems where no one can really afford to make or fund much beefier tools like IDEs, so a language server can be created by a community member and be used with pretty much all relevant editors almost instantly, meaning the ROI for the community is massive.

nequo 3y ago

I also think that parent's comment is overly dismissive of LSP. But for me, Emacs with lsp-mode does the things that you describe.

PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago
I mean, I wanted to love LSP. Everything I read about it suggested that I would. But I tried it out for two weeks, working (as normal) on my 600k LOC C++ project, and found it somewhere between irritating and not-actually-helpful. I appreciate that people who started programming with such tools probably come to rely on it the way I rely on dynamic completion in emacs (which is a lot).
- 59nadir 3y ago
  Considering C++ is almost impossible to write reliably good tools for it's entirely possible that LS for C++ is simply not very good and that with languages that can reliably provide a good LS experience you'd view this differently. I don't think it has anything to do with programming experience level. I've programmed for 24 years and I find language servers great when I can have them. 20 or so years on top of this is unlikely to change anything. For what it's worth I'd use CLion for C++, most likely, if I ever wanted to go back to C++ outside of tiny sandbox projects. P.S. Language servers are great for smaller ecosystems where no one can really afford to make or fund much beefier tools like IDEs, so a language server can be created by a community member and be used with pretty much all relevant editors almost instantly, meaning the ROI for the community is massive.