4 ms·
They decided to keep the code on the local machine, but the language server on the remote one. That seems like a recipe for inconsistency. You only get relevant
by Aeolun 2y ago
They decided to keep the code on the local machine, but the language server on the remote one. That seems like a recipe for inconsistency. You only get relevant results from your language server once your code has synced.
- Hackbraten 2y agoThe article mentions that the LSP itself already has baked-in support to enable editors to send chunks of unsaved edits to the language server (LS) as they happen. What Stripe’s configuration introduced is that they used a remote LS instead of the default local LS. Regardless, VS Code already defers LSP communication until it feels idle, and developers are used to that. So I wouldn’t expect a remote LS to significantly impact the level of inconsistency that developers already accept when using a local LS.
- Aeolun 2y agoHuh, I missed that first part. That’s a decent way to go about it.
- bastawhiz 2y agoI was at Stripe until 2022 and inconsistency with the language server was never an issue
- aidos 2y agoDue to the work that this team put in though, right? The choice to run dev environment far away from the files puts you in the position of needing to engineer your way past the inconsistency.
- bastawhiz 2y agoYes, almost certainly. On the other hand, there was so much code that running everything on your own laptop was essentially out of the question. Doing a git pull after a long vacation locked up your dev box for a hot minute while it checked all the types—doing the same thing on your MacBook would be painful at best.
- paxys 2y agoThe code syncs on every keystroke. Consistency isn't an issue unless you are having connection issues. And if you are then pretty much all development is broken anyways.