- 2 Posts
- 9 Comments
That was helpful, thanks.
As for LSP specifically, and in particular for Q2 & Q3: You are correct, those were meant to be very specific to session management and capabilities of existing, established protocol implementations of LSP. Would an implementation of those work without modifying editors? Looking at VSCode, LSP seems to be more of a guideline and it expected to provide your own LSP client plugin anyway, so it probably is less of a problem there. But some editors (e.g. Helix and Emacs) apparently have their official implementation.
Possibly. Hard to tell how much time that would have bought.
It was indeed three pawns to introduce it. Nice eye for detail.
Trump clearly is fascist (and so is Bolsonaro, for the sake of argument), but that’s just two samples. Whereas e.g. france got rid of that Napoleon dude (you know who I mean) in favor of Macron.
Hot, but probably not too hot take: Other factors aside, people got dumber due to covid. They got literal brain damage. So when a reasonably intelligent person would be able to tell fascism as insustainable, they wouldn’t after their second or so infection.
20·1 year agoinstall minor cc update
compiler exploits undefined behavior as it always was technically allowed to
Checkmate, Cniles!
All those unit test that the devs didn’t bother to test on other platforms.
On a second read, I think I should have worded the question in the titel and parts of the post differently. It’s probably not all important that the interpreter frontend is the LSP server as much as that they live in the same process. Because what the graphics are supposed to show is, this would avoid manually feeding the LSP server with function signatures.