Re: My perspective as a mid-level user on pros/cons of different editors

[Arthur Miller <arthur.miller@live.com>]

ndame <ndame@protonmail.com> writes:

>> As a user, I really want to be able to jump to
>> eclaration/implementation/find references/get completion to work etc. I
>> ouldn't care as slightest how it is implemented as long as it worked
>> ell. Unfortunately (or fortunately) I know all the minutiae details on
>> ow it works in my copy of Emacs since I had to install each and every
>> acakge and configure them all together to get that working for me.
>> hich indeed took quite some time untill I learned what I need, how to
>> onfigure it and finally how to use it.
>
> As you did it already how hard would it be you think to create a package which does this automatically?
You mean like create a package that will just do a certain config and
pull in dependecnies and such? I guess not too hard.
>
> I'm wondering why somebody hasn't made this already. 
> I don't mean a package in ELPA, but rather in MELPA, so the package is not restricted from downloading and installing a server, etc it could do anything what is needed
> to set up the configuration. Why aren't there packages for various languages which set up the completion/go to definition stuff automatically? Is there a technical
> problem?

Because there are so many different paths to do this, old semantic and
autocomplete, newer lsp, company, etc. lsp vs ycmd, and so on. I don't
think there is a concensus on which one is best and what is best
approach to achieve this, all have some pros and cons. Also lots is
putting together pieces found on diverse blogs, configs etc. Maybe it
will change not that lsp mode gets more accepted?