News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:LSP could have been better by nobleach on Thursday October 12, 2023 @07:20AM (#37855733)
You can say a lot about Microsoft the company. You can even take digs at Visual Studio Code and its "telemetry reporting". But LSP is one of the best things that's come out of that whole ordeal. It's far from perfect. But as a Vim user, we've had nothing this good until now. I used TernJS for JavaScript and some other handy plugins for other language specific stuff... and it was such a pain. LSP made things far more uniform. And they gave it away to the community! They didn't force anyone to use it.
Re:LSP could have been better by kstrauser on Thursday October 12, 2023 @10:56AM (#37858092)
I agree. I primarily use(d) Emacs, and while it’s had good support for certain languages for decades, now it handles younger languages like TypeScript and Rust exactly as well as Microsoft’s editors do. That’s freaking magical.
Re:LSP could have been better by tuukkah on Thursday October 12, 2023 @12:18PM (#37859273)
Microsoft does not use LSP for its own language TypeScript. They have something that works better for VSCode: tsserver. When TypeScript evolves, Microsoft updates tsserver and VSCode as needed. To get the updates to Emacs, someone needs to make the respective changes to a third-party TypeScript LSP first. And it won't work as well because LSP isn't as good.
Re:LSP could have been better by kstrauser on Thursday October 12, 2023 @01:06PM (#37859931)
Ugh, I didn't realize that.
Re:LSP could have been better by nobleach on Friday October 20, 2023 @04:20PM (#37961053)
typescript-tools for NeoVim uses tsserver