3 ms·

What would make it better than decent for you?

by sqs 2y ago

esafak 2y ago
1. Write the commit messages too. 2. Allow the user to refactor across selected portions of the entire project, not just one file.
- sqs 2y ago
  For 1, set `"cody.experimental.commitMessage": true` in VS Code and then click the Cody icon above the commit message box in VS Code's source control sidebar. Let me know how that works for you (here or at https://community.sourcegraph.com https://community.sourcegraph.com). For 2, we're working on it! And eventually we'll support cross-repository refactors in Cody using our batch changes (https://sourcegraph.com/docs/batch-changes https://sourcegraph.com/docs/batch-changes). What kind of refactors do you want to make?
  - esafak 2y ago
    1. I use Jetbrains. I don't suppose experimental flags are supported there too? 2. A reasonable near-term goal could be to make changes in one file propagate across the code base, so it remains consistent. This requires analyzing the call graph, which is something Sourcegraph already knows how to do. The next step could be to execute multi-file refactors without specifying which files to modify; e.g., "add support for WebAuthn using our auth provider's SDK".
    - sqs 2y ago
      1. Ah, this commit message feature isn't available in JetBrains yet, unfortunately. Most things carry over since they both use the same underlying code, but this is more editor-specific. 2. Your "reasonable near-term goal" is right in line with what we are thinking. Basically, "auto-edits" is f(edit that meets deterministic trigger criteria) --> multi-file diff. Here are some examples we have in mind; any others you had in mind? update a type signature --> ripple that change across to all call sites/value literals (kinda like symbolic rename does today, but for more than just the name) rename something --> update the docs change code with a comment nearby --> update the comment if it's now invalid update a func impl --> propose a new test case

What would make it better than decent for you?

by sqs 2y ago

What would make it better than decent for you?

1. Write the commit messages too. 2. Allow the user to refactor across selected portions of the entire project, not just one file.

sqs 2y ago
For 1, set `"cody.experimental.commitMessage": true` in VS Code and then click the Cody icon above the commit message box in VS Code's source control sidebar. Let me know how that works for you (here or at https://community.sourcegraph.com https://community.sourcegraph.com). For 2, we're working on it! And eventually we'll support cross-repository refactors in Cody using our batch changes (https://sourcegraph.com/docs/batch-changes https://sourcegraph.com/docs/batch-changes). What kind of refactors do you want to make?
- esafak 2y ago
  1. I use Jetbrains. I don't suppose experimental flags are supported there too? 2. A reasonable near-term goal could be to make changes in one file propagate across the code base, so it remains consistent. This requires analyzing the call graph, which is something Sourcegraph already knows how to do. The next step could be to execute multi-file refactors without specifying which files to modify; e.g., "add support for WebAuthn using our auth provider's SDK".
  - sqs 2y ago
    1. Ah, this commit message feature isn't available in JetBrains yet, unfortunately. Most things carry over since they both use the same underlying code, but this is more editor-specific. 2. Your "reasonable near-term goal" is right in line with what we are thinking. Basically, "auto-edits" is f(edit that meets deterministic trigger criteria) --> multi-file diff. Here are some examples we have in mind; any others you had in mind? update a type signature --> ripple that change across to all call sites/value literals (kinda like symbolic rename does today, but for more than just the name) rename something --> update the docs change code with a comment nearby --> update the comment if it's now invalid update a func impl --> propose a new test case