From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Troy Brown <brownts@troybrown.dev>
Cc: 73280@debbugs.gnu.org, joaotavora@gmail.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca
Subject: bug#73280: 30.0.90; Eglot: eglot-workspace-configuration might not be found in .dir-locals.el
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2024 22:17:01 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <861q1jcssy.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABvCZ416iSqrm53LUNth3bLn42EXvKZCrhAvX_DM4=wLSV75og@mail.gmail.com> (message from Troy Brown on Mon, 16 Sep 2024 14:53:53 -0400)
> From: Troy Brown <brownts@troybrown.dev>
> Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2024 14:53:53 -0400
> Cc: joaotavora@gmail.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, 73280@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> > With the emergence of the *-ts-mode modes, we need to adjust our
> > intuition. We decided that having foo-mode settings cover foo-ts-mode
> > as well as much as possible is an advantage, not a disadvantage. So
> > our intuition needs to follow suit.
> >
>
> That would be fine if this was isolated to only "ts" vs "non-ts"
> modes. Another example is "typescript-mode". In order to configure
> the server, you have to use "js-mode" in .dir-locals.el. Why?
> Because it's the first one in the list.
Isn't Typescript a variant of JavaScript?
> I proposed in my last response a mechanism where you could specify a
> configuration for any of the modes associated with a server and have
> it applied, rather than ignoring a configuration if it wasn't
> explicitly specified for the first one in the list.
I'm not against it, I just responded to the part of your arguments
which are more philosophical.
> > > I don't think I'd agree with the first mode being representative, it
> > > seems somewhat arbitrary. For instance, in order to change
> > > eglot-workspace-configuration for "sh-mode", you have to set the
> > > configuration in .dir-locals.el for "bash-ts-mode"...who would've
> > > guessed this?
> >
> > I'd like to think that in a not-so-distant future, _everyone_ will
> > guess that. Why not? it makes perfect sense to me.
>
> What is that? It's not consistent with the "foo-mode settings cover
> foo-ts-mode", it's actually the other way around.
Bash is a variant of a Bourne shell, isn't it?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-16 19:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-15 19:54 bug#73280: 30.0.90; Eglot: eglot-workspace-configuration might not be found in .dir-locals.el Troy Brown
2024-09-16 11:38 ` Eli Zaretskii
2024-09-16 13:48 ` João Távora
2024-09-16 17:07 ` Troy Brown
2024-09-16 18:15 ` Eli Zaretskii
2024-09-16 18:39 ` João Távora
2024-09-16 18:43 ` Eli Zaretskii
2024-09-16 18:53 ` Troy Brown
2024-09-16 19:07 ` João Távora
2024-09-16 21:34 ` Troy Brown
2024-09-16 19:17 ` Eli Zaretskii [this message]
2024-09-16 21:34 ` Stefan Monnier via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=861q1jcssy.fsf@gnu.org \
--to=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=73280@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=brownts@troybrown.dev \
--cc=joaotavora@gmail.com \
--cc=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).