On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 5:46 AM João Távora <joaotavora@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On closer analysis the only confusing thing is that the spec
> encourages clients to call textDocument/executeCommand with
> illegal ExecuteCommandParams objects that contain an extraneous
> 'title'
>
> Most servers apparently don't care, but Eglot is doing this and
> it's a subtle bug.
>
> I think the right thing to do is to have Command _and_
> ExecuteCommandParams in the matcher.
>

Thanks for the explanation.

> I've done a tweak to your patch.  See after my sig.  It's untested, so
> please have a look. If you can, test, add more comments, change the order
> if indeed it's needed.  You can also change the implementation if you think
> the recursiveness makes it more confusing.
>

I've updated the patch based on your suggestions.  I've tested all
invocations of executeCommand through Command, ExecuteCommandParams
and CodeAction and they all appear to be working as expected now.  I
think the recursion is fine, it's simple and elegant.  With regards to
the order, you are correct, since the command in CodeAction isn't a
string, it's not a problem.  I was previously erroneously only testing
with a string.