Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Expert: LSP for Elixir

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 47 posts

Re: Expert: LSP for Elixir

#11

Post by 0x457 »

zamalek wrote: post #8
mtndew4brkfst wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has both a justfile and a makefile at the root, even. Most of us seem to want to use it to throw make away entirely. That said, I consider `just` very language-agnostic and useful because of that, and I consider mix pretty bad at any workflow needs that isn't directly concerned with BEAM.

It's not technically a make replacement (make does do things like incremental build management etc.), but it just goes to show how bad the DX of make is.

IMO 'just' replaces make where make shouldn't be used - generic task runner.

Re: Expert: LSP for Elixir

#12

Post by epiccoleman »

Oh I'm excited for this. Editor support for elixir has never been quite as good as I'd like. I'm really happy to see they're investing in this - no lang with as consistently great a developer experience as elixir should be without a proper, official, well supported lang server.

Can't wait to try it out!

Re: Expert: LSP for Elixir

#13

Post by ashton314 »

Oo I’m excited for this. The old official language server is fine—it does its job on most of the code bases I’ve worked on, but occasionally I will do something funny that makes the compiler slow down and that pummels the LS performance. I hope this works out some of the kinks that occasionally would make elixir-ls slow.

Re: Expert: LSP for Elixir

#15

Post by mtndew4brkfst »

ashton314 wrote: post #13

Oo I’m excited for this. The old official language server is fine —it does its job on most of the code bases I’ve worked on, but occasionally I will do something funny that makes the compiler slow down and that pummels the LS performance. I hope this works out some of the kinks that occasionally would make elixir-ls slow.

Nit: there has never been an official LSP implementation until now, only community-authored. Even now no Dashbit employees or language core members are directly involved in this project in an ongoing basis.

IMO that contributes powerfully to the quality of the experiences of using any of the options.

Re: Expert: LSP for Elixir

#16

Post by mtndew4brkfst »

MangoToupe wrote: post #7
mtndew4brkfst wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has both a justfile and a makefile at the root, even. Most of us seem to want to use it to throw make away entirely. That said, I consider `just` very language-agnostic and useful because of that, and I consider mix pretty bad at any workflow needs that isn't directly concerned with BEAM.

I think it's hard for me to name better software than make. TeX, maybe? that seems like an insanely high bar to clear.

I would say there's an ocean of software with better UX than those two, so it all comes down to what axis you measure on.

Re: Expert: LSP for Elixir

#17

Post by gonglexin »

I’ve been switching between different LSP implementations for Elixir—ElixirLS, Lexical, next-ls—and have been following Expert for a while. Really looking forward to trying it out!

That said, the only thing that feels a bit off to me is the name “Expert.” It comes across slightly arrogant or presumptuous—like it’s implying it’s the only “expert” in the room. Maybe something more neutral would’ve been better?

Still, excited to see what the official tooling brings!

Re: Expert: LSP for Elixir

#20

Post by SwiftyBug »

gonglexin wrote: post #17

I’ve been switching between different LSP implementations for Elixir—ElixirLS, Lexical, next-ls—and have been following Expert for a while. Really looking forward to trying it out! That said, the only thing that feels a bit off to me is the name “Expert.” It comes across slightly arrogant or presumptuous—like it’s implying it’s the only “expert” in the room. Maybe something more neutral would’ve been better? Still, e…

How about "Fairly Knowledgeable, Always Humbly Ready to Learn from Others"?

FKAHRLO for short.

Post reply on HN