alt Hacker NewsI looked at the dependencies and noticed that it wasn’t using an existing Protobuf parser which means they reimplemented the parser from scratch. Perhaps due to a lack of error recovery in the existing implementations? I don’t have the energy right now for further inspection.
It is definitely best to reuse the parser for the runtime when implementing an LSP but to do so properly means implementing the parser itself as a standalone library. Even better is shipping the semantic analysis as well!
Implementation drift is definitely an issue.
But great project anyways, just wanted to put my thoughts on the matter into the conversation!
Replies
It is my understanding that basically all LSP implementations use tree-sitter because of its incremental rebuild capability, and this requires re-implementing the parser.
buf is a parser / compiler as an alternative to protoc https://buf.build/docs/migration-guides/migrate-from-protoc/
I think its worth considering but I don’t agree it’s always best to use the language parser.
A language parser should be correct. A LSP parser should be fault tolerant. My understanding is you cant have both.