Pedro Andres Aranda Gutierrez <paaguti@gmail.com> writes:
> Hi,
>
> knowing there are much more pressing issues, I nevertheless would like to
> spend a couple of cycles rewording a reflection of mine from the past:
>
> There are lots of LSPs around with adequate Web pages.
> Most include configuration examples for various editors/IDEs.
> How many include a configuration example for Emacs?
>
> Maybe it is because of the ELISP-centric approach followed by eglot.
> Nothing against it, but it is not exactly an incentive for someone trying
> to jump into Emacs (from scratch).
> Because, unfortunately, the whole eglot configuration stuff is not easy to
> read or understand when you are /starting/ with Emacs.
Isn't one of the appeals of Eglot that it works without having to
customise anything? All you need is M-x eglot (which I understand is
something that might confuse people, but it has an option in the menu
that one could also point to).
You may want to customize the LSP through eglot using
`eglot-workspace-configuration'...
A simple example. When working in Python with the scapy package,
you may want to silence E408 from flake8 because of the way things
are imported.
> How difficult would it be to allow for a JSON configuration file for eglot
> as an alternative?
> It would surely lower this hurdle.
Just for Eglot, or in general?
No, just for eglot. The problem of configuring the LSP from Emacs is well beyond
the abilities of a novice and the details are too tricky and scare people away from
Emacs.
From a readability point of view, compare time-tuning `eglot-workspace-configuration'
in Emacs with how it is done in, say, neovim in
> Thanks for the cycles,
> /Pedro A.
>
> PS: When I show my Emacs setup at work, I spark interest in it, which fades
> away when they see what they need to understand the whole setup. And maybe
> the hardest part for most potential users is eglot.