2 ms·
Unpopular opinion -- LSPs are bad because they introduce latency into coding. For every keystroke, my IDE needs to make request/response with LSP, instead of us
by deepsun 2mo ago
Unpopular opinion -- LSPs are bad because they introduce latency into coding. For every keystroke, my IDE needs to make request/response with LSP, instead of using its own internal parser/colorer/autocomplete.
- atiedebee 2mo agoYou can just not use an LSP? My understanding is that LSPs aren't made to be the fastest (code completion|syntax highlighter|code analysis), but easily integrated into all sorts of IDEs/text editors.
- deepsun 2mo agoAs far as I understand, IDEs ara way less eager to spend resources onto their own integration if there's an LSP. E.g. last time I tried to code in Zig there was either LSP or nothing.
- chlorion 2mo agoMaybe if you have an extremely slow computer? Even my little chromebook can provide completions and errors effectively instantly to me, even in medium sized rust projects. Or are you saying (probably maximum) ~20ms delay is blocking your ability to code?
- deepsun 2mo agoIt's not 20ms, 1-2 seconds for sure, for Zig LSP. 96GB RAM, 12 vCPU, Linux, desktop.
- ecnahc515 2mo agoLSP isn't used for syntax highlights usually, that's still the job of the editor. This is where something like treesitter usually comes in. LSP is only used in this case for errors/annotations/etc.