Developer forums (C::B DEVELOPMENT STRICTLY!) > CodeCompletion redesign
an easy cpp language-server-protocol client(C++)
gh_origin:
--- Quote from: oBFusCATed on December 13, 2020, 01:09:49 pm ---
--- Quote from: gh_origin on December 12, 2020, 04:04:59 pm ---Please don't follow CodeLite. CodeLite starting utilizing LSP, then today they make LSP the default method of code completion. And who knows someday they would rely completely on LSP and abandon their own code completion?
At least, make the LSP plugin not installed or enabled by default and let the users to install or turn it on as a fallback option when the standard CodeBlocks' code completion doesn't suite their needs.
--- End quote ---
Unfortunately LSP is the path forward for CC in codeblocks.
I see no one actively maintaining the parser and it is lagging a lot at the moment.
Also given the features introduced in C++ with every new standard - it would be pretty hard task to keep it updated given our resources.
--- End quote ---
I understand. Indeed, I don't care much. But my impression of LSP (the first experience) on CodeLite is it's just not work. So I prefer to be careful, not jumping to LSP by default too fast like CodeLite. But if CodeBlocks could get LSP working right, then who care if it's the standard code completion or LSP being used? Man, if you could get LSP working and CodeBlocks could have a code completion as good as VSCode (never used this editor, only saw on youtube videos), I support you with my whole heart.
gh_origin:
Why a full language server (clangd, ccls,...) but not only libclang? This IDE utilizes only libclang and some other individual tools (ctags, clang-format,...) but not a full language server, and it code completion IMHO is very good. Only tried it on Linux, but it supports Windows via MSYS2, too. BTW, it also supports language servers, but for other languages, not C++.
https://gitlab.com/cppit/jucipp
Could we learn from it? I really really don't trust language server. My experience with CodeLite was too bad.
BlueHazzard:
With language server you get a lot languages for free....
with clang you have only c/c++
oBFusCATed:
--- Quote from: BlueHazzard on December 13, 2020, 04:51:24 pm ---With language server you get a lot languages for relatively cheap....
--- End quote ---
I've corrected this for you :)
From what I've seen the LSP client needs non-trivial changes for every LSP server. For VS.code it is easy, because they write everything in *script.
@gh_origin: I don't understand why you whine so much about some future C::B change based on 10 minute experience with another program. Calm down please. Also given you don't work on massive projects clangd would be quite an improvement for the "hello world" student type of projects. Especially if you pair clangd with clang and not gcc/mingw.
Also suggesting some other ways to do it doesn't help. Given the amount of work needed to do them is higher than LSP client. Also nothing stops anyone from porting the current CC to be a LSP server. Read this https://langserver.org/ for the idea behind LSP.
gh_origin:
--- Quote from: BlueHazzard on December 13, 2020, 04:51:24 pm ---With language server you get a lot languages for free....
with clang you have only c/c++
--- End quote ---
Which language does CodeBlocks being IDE for? C/C++.
Unless you want to be both an JavaScript, NodeJS and PHP IDE as CodeLite.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version