The line separator is moved below the function signature to split
regions between the docs. This is very similar to how IntelliJ
displays tooltips. Adding an additional separator between the module
name and function signature currently has rendering issues.
Fixes#4594
Alternative to #4615
4602: Add boolean literal semantic token type to package.json r=matklad a=lnicola
Closes#4583.
CC @GrayJack
4603: Add self keyword semantic token type r=matklad a=lnicola
Not sure if this is warranted a new token type or just a modifier.
---
CC #4583, @GrayJack
Co-authored-by: Laurențiu Nicola <lnicola@dend.ro>
4571: KISS SourceChange r=matklad a=matklad
The idea behind requiring the label is a noble one, but we are not
really using it consistently anyway, and it should be easy to retrofit
later, should we need it.
bors r+
Co-authored-by: Aleksey Kladov <aleksey.kladov@gmail.com>
The idea behind requiring the label is a noble one, but we are not
really using it consistently anyway, and it should be easy to retrofit
later, should we need it.
4516: LSP: Two stage initialization r=kjeremy a=kjeremy
Fills in server information.
Derives CodeAction capabilities from the client. If code action literals
are unsupported we fall back to the "simple support" which just sends back
commands (this is already supported in our config). The difference being
that we did not adjust our server capabilities so that if the client was
checking for `CodeActionProvider: "true"` in the response that would have failed.
Part of #144Fixes#4130 (the specific case called out in that issue)
Co-authored-by: kjeremy <kjeremy@gmail.com>
This also changes our handiling of snippet edits on the client side.
`editor.insertSnippet` unfortunately forces indentation, which we
really don't want to have to deal with. So, let's just implement our
manual hacky way of dealing with a simple subset of snippets we
actually use in rust-analyzer
Fills in server information.
Derives CodeAction capabilities from the client. If code action literals
are unsupported we fall back to the "simple support" which just sends back
commands (this is already supported in our config). The difference being
that we did not adjust our server capabilities so that if the client was
checking for `CodeActionProvider: "true"` in the response that would have failed.
4448: Generate configuration for launch.json r=vsrs a=vsrs
This PR adds two new commands: `"rust-analyzer.debug"` and `"rust-analyzer.newDebugConfig"`. The former is a supplement to the existing `"rust-analyzer.run"` command and works the same way: asks for a runnable and starts new debug session. The latter allows adding a new configuration to **launch.json** (or to update an existing one).
If the new option `"rust-analyzer.debug.useLaunchJson"` is set to true then `"rust-analyzer.debug"` and Debug Lens will first look for existing debug configuration in **launch.json**. That is, it has become possible to specify startup arguments, env variables, etc.
`"rust-analyzer.debug.useLaunchJson"` is false by default, but it might be worth making true the default value. Personally I prefer true, but I'm not sure if it is good for all value.
----
I think that this PR also solves https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/3441.
Both methods to update launch.json mentioned in the issue do not work:
1. Menu. It is only possible to add a launch.json configuration template via a debug adapter. And anyway it's only a template and it is impossible to specify arguments from an extension.
2. DebugConfigurationProvider. The exact opposite situation: it is possible to specify all debug session settings, but it is impossible to export these settings to launch.json.
Separate `"rust-analyzer.newDebugConfig"` command looks better for me.
----
Fixes#4450Fixes#3441
Co-authored-by: vsrs <vit@conrlab.com>
Co-authored-by: vsrs <62505555+vsrs@users.noreply.github.com>
