[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#59214: [PATCH] Alternate rust-analyzer command added
From: |
Stefan Kangas |
Subject: |
bug#59214: [PATCH] Alternate rust-analyzer command added |
Date: |
Wed, 16 Nov 2022 16:12:41 -0800 |
João Távora <joaotavora@gmail.com> writes:
> After thinking about it some more, I think this case is comparable to
> ensuring 'serverx' is available in PATH/exec-path, which is something
> that we already ask users to do (not only for LSP servers). So I'd say
> don't change the value.
The difference is that rust-analyzer itself recommends using the rustup
invocation as an alternative to adding the language server to PATH.[1]
I also don't see any downside to adding it. The variable will get a
tiny bit uglier perhaps, but the benefit is that a real hurdle will be
eliminated for users. That's a win in my book.
Footnotes:
[1] https://rust-analyzer.github.io/manual.html#rustup
- bug#59214: [PATCH] Alternate rust-analyzer command added, Pankaj Jangid, 2022/11/12
- bug#59214: [PATCH] Alternate rust-analyzer command added, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/11/16
- bug#59214: [PATCH] Alternate rust-analyzer command added, M. Ian Graham, 2022/11/17
- bug#59214: [PATCH] Alternate rust-analyzer command added, Pankaj Jangid, 2022/11/17
- bug#59214: [PATCH] Alternate rust-analyzer command added, M. Ian Graham, 2022/11/17
- bug#59214: [PATCH] Alternate rust-analyzer command added, Pankaj Jangid, 2022/11/17
- bug#59214: [PATCH] Alternate rust-analyzer command added, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/11/17
- bug#59214: [PATCH] Alternate rust-analyzer command added, João Távora, 2022/11/17