[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability
From: |
João Távora |
Subject: |
bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability |
Date: |
Mon, 27 Feb 2023 11:15:00 +0000 |
On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 3:37 PM Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
>
> > From: João Távora <joaotavora@gmail.com>
> > Cc: arstoffel@gmail.com, 61726@debbugs.gnu.org
> > Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2023 15:15:57 +0000
> >
> > Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> >
> >
> > >> But as I said this is just a nit.
> > >
> > > I made one more fix.
> >
> > FTR, I think it's way worse now. The function variable has no clear
> > protocol: it's very odd to state its return type as number of code units
> > _or_ bytes _or_ code points. A good docstring for such a variable notes
> > that, for any buffer position, a plugged-in function must return the
> > same _type_ but may return a different _value_ to match the
> > unit-counting strategy being used by the LSP server.
>
> It cannot return the same value,. it must return a value in the same
> units as its opposite.
I wrote "return the same _type_ but may return a different _value_".
The doc string says:
>
> This is the inverse of `eglot-move-to-linepos-function' (which see).
> It is a function of no arguments returning the number of code units
> or bytes or codepoints corresponding to the current position of point,
> relative to line beginning, as expected by the function that is the
> value of `eglot-move-to-linepos-function'.")
>
> Note the last sentence.
Yes, I understand the intention. That's a good detail, to state that
when that other function is fed the return value of this one, position
should remain unaltered. I just did that.
> It's your package, so feel free to make any changes you like.
Done, and closing. We can deal with the `line-beginning-position` thing
afterwards. It's only tangentially related to this encoding-supporting feature.
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, (continued)
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, Augusto Stoffel, 2023/02/25
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/26
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, João Távora, 2023/02/26
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, João Távora, 2023/02/26
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/26
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/26
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, João Távora, 2023/02/26
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/26
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, João Távora, 2023/02/26
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/26
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability,
João Távora <=
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/26
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, João Távora, 2023/02/26
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, Augusto Stoffel, 2023/02/24
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/24
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, Augusto Stoffel, 2023/02/24
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/24
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, João Távora, 2023/02/24
- bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/24
bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, João Távora, 2023/02/23
bug#61726: [PATCH] Eglot: Support positionEncoding capability, Felician Nemeth, 2023/02/23