4 ms·
I am wary of LSP. I should try LSP again using eastwood, which probably has its trade-offs. While I absolutely admire Borkdude's many gifts to the Clojure com
by waffletower 2y ago
I am wary of LSP. I should try LSP again using eastwood, which probably has its trade-offs. While I absolutely admire Borkdude's many gifts to the Clojure community, the lack of static analysis in clj-kondo is a non-starter for me -- macro support is painfully manual. Because of its speed, clj-kondo likely is more performant in an editor LSP context, but too opinionated for me.
- iLemming 2y agoI don't know what you're talking about; it feels to me like you're complaining that your camel isn't a Ferrari. Clojure is inherently very dynamic - fully automatic static analysis of Clojure code is extremely difficult. Not just Clojure - any other Lisp too. Do you think that for almost four decades of Emacs Lisp existence, nobody built a deep static analysis tool only because people were just stupid, lazy, or had no incentives? Kondo is actually considered the best-in-class tool for Clojure linting/analysis, and its manual macro configuration is a practical compromise given the language's design. > macro support is painfully manual. If programming was effortless, I would have no job, I bet you wouldn't have either.