Re: [NonGNU ELPA] new package: clangd-inactive-regions

[Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net>]

Filippo Argiolas <filippo.argiolas@gmail.com> writes:

> On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 6:34 AM Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:
>>   > > It's an eglot extension that listens to clangd inactiveRegions
>>   > > notifications and shades inactive code accordingly. It's useful to
>>   > > highlight disabled code sections in a LSP aware way, honoring current
>>   > > building options and defines.
>>
>> Does "inactive region" mean unreachable code?  I am guessin so.
>>
>> Is there a standard way for lamguage servers to report unreachable code?
>> Could we make Emacs recognize that way?  Then eglot could handle it
>> for any language, and it would not be specific to clangd.
>
> In this context it means unreachable code as disabled by the
> preprocessor stage, e.g. code under a currently disabled ifdef branch.
> LSP advantage here is providing knowledge about how a file is compiled
> with proper build time flags and defines for current build
> configuration.
>
> At the moment it's a clangd specific extension, there was some plan[1]
> for standard LSP inclusion but I'm not sure it went anywhere.
> Also, does this specific meaning make sense for non c/c++/preprocessed
> languages?

It might not be a bad idea to anticipate future standardisations, or
other LSP servers supporting similar functionality, and branding the
package as eglot-inactive-regions instead of the more specific
clangd-inactive-regions (which also doesn't hint that it is eglot
specific).

> I believe unreachable in the control flow/static analysis sense can
> already be achieved with normal LSP diagnostics. If I am not mistaken
> clangd already provides diagnostics for this when clang-tidy is
> enabled.
>
>
> 1. https://github.com/clangd/clangd/issues/132#issuecomment-1722327517
>
>

-- 
	Philip Kaludercic on siskin