From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Spencer Baugh Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#69584: 29.2.50; project-find-functions should have access to maybe-prompt Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 09:05:40 -0400 Message-ID: References: <65b29bab-3149-49e3-a6ae-6c0c1485e6f2@gutov.dev> <875xxmjoc9.fsf@catern.com> <34e15612-77bc-4a67-b493-e00c97d1155e@gutov.dev> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="34431"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: sbaugh@catern.com, 69584@debbugs.gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 22 14:11:01 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rnefl-0008gP-9q for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 14:11:01 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rnefK-0004bV-K0; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 09:10:34 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rnef8-0004ao-VZ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 09:10:24 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rnef7-0007rw-Fl for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 09:10:22 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rnefl-0004vG-P5 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 09:11:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Spencer Baugh Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 13:11:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69584 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 69584-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B69584.171111301518770 (code B ref 69584); Fri, 22 Mar 2024 13:11:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 69584) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Mar 2024 13:10:15 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51089 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rnef0-0004sd-JF for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 09:10:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mxout5.mail.janestreet.com ([64.215.233.18]:41895) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rnebL-0004g6-1j for 69584@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 09:06:28 -0400 In-Reply-To: <34e15612-77bc-4a67-b493-e00c97d1155e@gutov.dev> (Dmitry Gutov's message of "Mon, 18 Mar 2024 23:59:40 +0200") DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=janestreet.com; s=waixah; t=1711112740; bh=oJfxZ4S70Z/KYttUOqBSc6GxfciBIdEgO/tejkVIRaU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=qeAgS/lUHezpNpomp+jriOr5W1o/spq+3Ftlc5xh1uuuz8Lc46nMqB3BkZd07FvMj k2yctkbD853UcpElhHRzIH+QQ/zWWLmENsn8Ta5H167Y1WQAeLgTAJ9MEGbOBafmHN HlsOWWsLoimn9nzDzhSG3LxXoJbfxghJjo3g0r6BO+iszNBk2lZmOfQyc4p//zyoGI glAH1oaOXVO/4WQFOn6euu1DbFdZjDwFMlKoshUfC+r5Qsi3K8lSUZcATxQMyofcgk HXEevRe/99lNt8gTMsJ0WDeESrGotGEEIvHccAr9Jl764diVNO/AUlYTKz9rUPHk5I GTiTuqg46R1Cw== X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:281938 Archived-At: Dmitry Gutov writes: >>> With regards to caching, for example, if some caller wanted to do so >>> (some related discussion: >>> https://github.com/joaotavora/breadcrumb/issues/18#issuecomment-1984615275), >>> then would also need to take this parameter into account. >> True, but it's already not correct to cache when maybe-prompt=t, >> right? >> Because the returned project may just be the one that the user choose >> interactively at the prompt. > > It's... a good point, but so far the main exception was the > "transient" project, for which one could make an exception somehow, or > even cache without major downsides, as long as buffer stays the same > and the cache interval is low. > > Disabling cache altogether with maybe-prompt=t might be a net > negative, given that many users' interaction with project.el might be > limited to commands that only do such invocations. But perhaps it's > the price to pay for flexibility: as long as we're talking about > external cache, it will be up to the callers to avoid caching where > the results can be non-deterministic, such as after a prompt. Hm, I'm slightly confused, isn't the problem more general than just the transient project? If I run (project-current t directory), and I get a project back, I have no idea whether that project is actually for DIRECTORY or not: if DIRECTORY is not in a project at all, the returned project is instead some project selected by the user with project-prompter. >>> So the first thing I'd ask is whether you see a different way to >>> implement the same features. I don't see the whole usage scenarios, so >>> it's hard to judge. >> Let me give some context about my concrete use case. >> At Jane Street we have a code review system built on top of Emacs, >> called FE. A user opens a code review in a buffer in Emacs, and can see >> that review's diff. If they want to comment on the review, or build the >> code or test it or anything like that, they need to also have a local >> working copy of the code in the review. The local working copy for each >> review is kept separately, like git worktrees. >> (There are some other details and screenshots in >> https://blog.janestreet.com/putting-the-i-back-in-ide-towards-a-github-explorer/ >> but this should suffice) >> So my use case then is this: when a user opens code review FE-123 in >> a >> buffer, they look at the diff and then decide they want to do something >> in a working copy of the code. Currently, to do that they run one of a >> variety of internal commands which duplicate things like >> project-find-file, but which are aware of whether or not there's a local >> working copy, and operate the local working copy if any, and otherwise >> prompt to create a local working copy and then error. >> I'd like to replace those internal commands with just normal >> project-find-file, and also allow other commands which use >> project-current to determine the current project to just work. > > If you set up a project instance in a buffer-local way, would it even > work correctly outside of that buffer? Hm, I don't see why it wouldn't? It's not really any different, again, from project-prompter returning a project when DIRECTORY isn't a project. I'm intending for these functions to return a totally normal vc project, to be clear - the only magic is in initially finding that vc project, when default-directory isn't in that vc project. > Would project history work fine? When you pick a project from recently > visited, you basically just apply its last root directory and expect > the project to be "found". The project-root would be just be the normal directory that the project actually is located in, in the filesystem. And since it would be a normal vc project, project-find-functions would return the same project instance when run on its root. So that would work fine too. > I've read the article (thanks!), but I'm not sure yet of what would be > the ergonomic savings in such scenario when instead of having a > separate command to check out a branch and visit a file in it (perhaps > bound to 'o f' inside the major mode map for the branches list's > buffer), you call project-find-file right away. In the former scenario > such command would make sure the branch is checked out, so its > directory has proper contents, and then it could delegate to > project-find-file inside said directory. And later visits (e.g. from > project-switch-project) would work fine until the directory is > deleted. Consider project-vc-dir or project-dired. The default-directory of these directories is the project root, so if you want to operate on the project, you can do that in these buffers. And that's convenient and good - you can do things like find-file or project-find-file or whatever, because these buffers are conceptually "within" the project. The branch overview is like project-vc-dir, but you can also open it when there's no local working copy for a branch. If there *is* a local working copy, the branch overview has a default-directory in the project, so you can treat it like project-vc-dir or project-dired. This is the common case, this works great. If there isn't a local working copy, the branch overview has a default-directory of "/" just because there's no sensible default-directory for the buffer. And if you open a branch overview and you know there's no local working copy, you could run a command to create a local working copy and only then start treating it like project-vc-dir, running commands which operate on the project. But, it's convenient to be able to ignore whether a given branch overview has a local copy or not. Indeed, there are heuristics which pre-create local copies for branches you are likely to interact with, e.g. branches you need to review code for. So for normal development, there will usually be a local working copy before you open the branch overview, even without your intervention. So you can get away with only rarely explicitly creating one. So when you open up a branch overview, you'll usually assume there's a local copy, and so your first action will probably some command which uses project-current. But if there's no working copy, then you'll get dropped to a prompt to choose a project, instead of (say) a project-find-file prompt, which you might not immediately notice, which is confusing, and you'll have to C-g out of it, and then run some other command to create the working copy. All that is a hassle. A few other potential things I could do to solve that confusing situation: - My project-find-function could detect if it's running in a branch overview buffer without a local copy and immediately error, which stops project-current from running, so it can't prompt. - I could make the branch overview buffer always have a default-directory of the location where the local copy *will* be created, even if it doesn't currently exist. (All of the local working copies are created as subdirectories of one specific directory.) Then my project-find-function could look at the default-directory string without touching the filesystem, detect that it's in the directory for projects managed by my package, and return a project instance with a project-root that doesn't actually exist, so then project-find-file will fail when it tries to list files for a nonexistent project. I'm guessing both of those also have undesirable implications for the project-current semantics, though? >>>> Since adding a new argument to project-find-functions is hard, maybe we >>>> could do this by introducing a new dynamic variable >>>> project-find-functions-may-prompt which we let-bind? Like: >>>> diff --git a/lisp/progmodes/project.el b/lisp/progmodes/project.el >>>> index c7c07c3d34c..3975182b88d 100644 >>>> --- a/lisp/progmodes/project.el >>>> +++ b/lisp/progmodes/project.el >>>> @@ -242,8 +242,9 @@ project-current >>>> (setq pr (cons 'transient directory)))) >>>> pr)) >>>> -(defun project--find-in-directory (dir) >>>> - (run-hook-with-args-until-success 'project-find-functions dir)) >>>> +(defun project--find-in-directory (dir &optional maybe-prompt) >>>> + (let ((project-find-functions-may-prompt maybe-prompt)) >>>> + (run-hook-with-args-until-success 'project-find-functions dir))) >>>> (defvar project--within-roots-fallback nil) >>> >>> As far as the implementation goes, a dynamic variable can work. We >>> could also try reusing an existing one: non-essential, and we'd set it >>> to nil when maybe-prompt is non-nil. >>> >>> I wonder how it would interact with Tramp (ask for password in >>> disconnected buffers?), but that seems to fall into the same general >>> category as your other cases. >> Nice idea, it does seem like we should probably already be binding >> non-essential=t around project-find-functions when maybe-prompt is nil. >> Since already TRAMP can cause prompting even when a programmer calls >> project-current with maybe-prompt=nil. > > If this change will be enough to cover your scenario, let's go ahead > and add the 'non-essential' binding. It does seem to make sense for > Tramp, at least. Yes, that completely covers my scenario. (Putting aside whether my scenario is a good idea :) ) So I would be happy with that.