[ new ] Add a GenerateDefNext code action
#226
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The existing LSP
GenerateDefcode action will generate a list of possible definitions for a type declaration. An alternative mode of interacting with these generated definitions would be to cycle through them.This PR introduces the
GenerateDefNextcode action which cycles through generated defs inline (a previous def is replaced when the next one is requested).In order for this new functionality to work, we need to carry forward proof search state across file loading. As best I can figure, this should be fine and has no negative impact on other existing LSP functionality, but there is definitely a possibility of regression in this area so we should be cognizant of the potential need to undo this change. If needed, the state needed for this
GenerateDefNextcode action could also be stored in LSP specific state instead of repl state.