Skip to content

Meta for tracking Language Server issues #1006

Closed

Description

List of issues we need to resolve in PTVS GitHub

Activity

  1. added
    feature-requestRequest for new features or functionality
    area-intellisenseLSP-related functionality: auto-complete, docstrings, navigation, refactoring, etc.
    metaIssue that is tracking an overall project
    on Mar 9, 2018
  2. brettcannon commented on Mar 9, 2018

    @brettcannon
    Member

    Why don't you want to track this in the project?

  3. MikhailArkhipov commented on Mar 15, 2018

    @MikhailArkhipov
    Author

    I need a single place to find all related PTVS links

  4. zooba commented on Mar 20, 2018

    @zooba
    Member

    FYI, I renamed "Support PEP style type hints" to "Support comment type hints". We already support PEP 484 style hints, but only in annotations.

  5. changed the title [-]Meta for tracking PTVS issues[/-] [+]Meta for tracking Language Server issues[/+] on Jun 4, 2018
  6. removed this from the May 2018 milestone on Jun 6, 2018
  7. davidhalter commented on Jul 4, 2018

    @davidhalter

    Hi guys

    I was wondering if you could explain a bit why you are pushing forward to use PTVS instead of Jedi (correct me if I'm wrong). IMO Jedi is still the better solution for a couple of reasons:

    • Jedi is written in Python and has therefore better community support.
    • Jedi has a long history (6+ years) with a lot of learnings and years of refactorings.
    • Jedi understands dynamic features very well (list.append(), searching for function executions...)
    • Jedi understands many of the weird import practices (old/new school namespace packages, eggs, zip archives, etc)
    • Jedi can complete f-strings, async/await things and has generally a very good understanding of modern Python features.
    • Since the latest Jedi version, Virtual Environments and different Python versions are perfectly handled in Jedi.
    • Parso is generally a very fast parser, because it only parses the changes people made. This is unfortunately still the source of some errors, but it also makes parsing very fast in big files (3 kLOC+)
    • Jedi is generally very well tested (~ 2k tests, 850 in parso).
    • There are currently 196 bugs open in PTVS, 26 bugs being related to Intellisense; Jedi has currently 12 open bugs, 6 being related to "Intellisense" (6 being linter bug, which is not used by anyone). parso (Jedi's parser) has currently one open bug.

    So what I'm asking is, is there a way we could make Jedi better so you would reconsider? Or is this decision driven by the idea that you only have one stack and only C# dependencies?

    There are many features that have not been implemented in Jedi, but would easily be possible given time or appropriate resources: Refactoring, Projects, Better Usages, Better Django support...

    BTW: There are a lot of features on Jedi's roadmap this year anyway (among them typeshed).

    ~ Dave

  8. brettcannon commented on Jul 6, 2018

    @brettcannon
    Member

    There are basically two reasons we are working on bringing the analysis engine from the Python workload in Visual Studio over to VS Code:

    1. Consolidation to a single analysis engine (as you accurately guessed): since Visual Studio also needs an analysis engine we had to make a decision between Visual Studio or Jedi, and it's easier for us to change than it is for Visual Studio to switch to Jedi
    2. Doing more than completions/IntelliSense: we want this new language server to do more than just IntelliSense to remove other third-party dependencies while also benefiting Visual Studio

    IOW this has nothing to do with the job you have done with Jedi or its feature set -- now or in the future -- and everything to do with us and our specific needs.

  9. davidhalter commented on Jul 19, 2018

    @davidhalter

    Thanks for your answer. This is of course an understandable decision - even if it is a bit disappointing for me :)

    Doing more than completions/IntelliSense: we want this new language server to do more than just IntelliSense to remove other third-party dependencies while also benefiting Visual Studio

    If you're looking for a bigger feature set within Jedi, please also let me know. I can obviously not help you with your first point, but there are quite a few features planned that are not just InteliSense, like refactoring or auto-imports. It's just a question of what to prioritize.

  10. sbstp commented on Jul 21, 2018

    @sbstp

    Does the PTVS work on Mac and Linux without having to install Mono? If not, it would be nice if the jedi provider was still maintained.

  11. brettcannon commented on Jul 23, 2018

    @brettcannon
    Member

    sbstp we assume the user has no .NET runtime installed (even on Windows).

  12. brettcannon commented on Jul 23, 2018

    @brettcannon
    Member

    Dave Halter (@davidhalter) I emailed you privately about that (and I'm always happy to share what feedback we're getting to help you prioritize your work).

  13. MikhailArkhipov commented on Aug 23, 2018

    @MikhailArkhipov
    Author

    Closing this one as we are tracking issues directly

  14. locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators on Sep 20, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Labels

area-intellisenseLSP-related functionality: auto-complete, docstrings, navigation, refactoring, etc.area-lintingfeature-requestRequest for new features or functionalitymetaIssue that is tracking an overall project

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions