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

Claude Code gets native LSP support

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 352 posts

Re: Claude Code gets native LSP support

#311

Post by jayd16 »

raincole wrote: post #268
spullara wrote: post #31

I really can't understand why JetBrains hasn't integrated its refactoring tools into the AI system. Really missed the boat on making their platform transformational for AI coding. Imagine how much smaller the context would be for a tool that renames a function than editing hundreds of files. This LSP support is a good start but without the mutation functions it is still pretty lackluster. Plus LSPs aren't as good as…

It's interesting that everyone is saying "please don't shove AI down our throat!". But when a company actually takes this approach (JetBrains IDEs treat AI just as a tool at the sidebar), everyone is like "JetBrains is doomed because it's not agent-native enough."

Yeah, I really appreciate that JB has not made an utter mess of my IDE and has not forced anything on me.

Re: Claude Code gets native LSP support

#312

Post by kaibee »

sunaookami wrote: post #252
ascorbic wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same reason you want an LSP in your editor: so you get inline docs and error messages, autocomplete, jump to definition, refactoring actions etc.

But what is the benefit for Claude Code? You don't write code in Claude Code so why would I need autocomplete or jump to definition? Does Claude itself use them instead of e.g. grepping? Struggling to understand how it helps.

> Does Claude itself use them instead of e.g. grepping? Struggling to understand how it helps.

That would be the idea.

Re: Claude Code gets native LSP support

#313

Post by HarHarVeryFunny »

cube2222 wrote: post #29
shepherdjerred wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you having a positive experience with Codex compared to Claude Code? Codex in my brief experience was... not good w/ 5.1

Just to provide another datapoint - tried codex September / October after seeing the glowing reviews here, and it was, all in all, a huge letdown. It seems to be very efficient context-wise, but at the same time made precise context-management much harder. Opus 4.5 is quite a magnificent improvement over Sonnet 4.5, in CC, though. Re tfa - I accidentally discovered the new lsp support 2 days ago on a side project in…

What are some of the use cases for Claude Code + LSP ? What does LSP support let you do, or do better, that Claude Code couldn't do by itself ?

Re: Claude Code gets native LSP support

#314

Post by emerongi »

calderwoodra wrote: post #296
KptMarchewa wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm kinda reading this with disbelief. Are there people whose primary use case for IDE is... git gui?

Remember this when you're thinking about the average commenter's opinion on anything technical.

Remember what? That people have different preferences, workflows and methods of staying productive?

Someone voiced that they liked a certain tool for a certain feature and suddenly we are judging them for it? I like that people share their thoughts and opinions.

Re: Claude Code gets native LSP support

#315

Post by losvedir »

imiric wrote: post #212
losvedir wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're pointing out that the "agent" is just 100 lines of code with a single tool. That means the model itself has improved, since such a bare bones agent is little more than invoking the model in a loop.

That doesn't make sense, considering that the idea of an "agentic workflow" is essentially to invoke the model in a loop. It could probably be done in much less than 100 lines. This doesn't refute the fact that this simple idea can be very useful. Especially since the utility doesn't come from invoking the model in a loop, but from integrating it with external tools and APIs, all of which requires much more code. We'…

The original point was that the previous SotA was a "heavily harnessed" agent, which I took to mean it had more tools at its disposal and perhaps some code to manage context and so on. The fact that the model can do it now in just 100 LoC and a terminal tool implied the model itself has improved. It's gotten better at standard terminal commands at least, and possibly bigger context window or more effectively using the data in its context window.

Those are improvements to the model, albeit in service of agentic workflows. I consider that distinct from improvements to agents themselves which are things like MCP, context management, etc.

Re: Claude Code gets native LSP support

#317

Post by maccard »

enlyth wrote: post #262
midasz wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, VS Code git implementation is really off-putting if you've used something good.

Personally I love it and find it very intuitive. It allows you to do stuff so much faster than having to type everything manually into the terminal. Also really enjoy the "Undo Last Commit" feature and how I can easily see all modified files at once and shuffle around stuff between the staging area.

The parent is comparing it to, e.g. jetbrains git integration.

Re: Claude Code gets native LSP support

#318

Post by Jgrubb »

blitz_skull wrote: post #177
anthonypasq wrote: post #48

I find it so weird that people are so bullish on the CLI form factor when they are literally just adding functionality that IDE based agents get for free. Stuff like improved diff tools and LSP support in the terminal instead of idk... just using a GUI/IDE? Pretty sure Cursor has had this for a while.

I have not yet had an IDE-based agent give anything close to the CLI Claude Code experience. So until it manages to do that, I’ll keep being bullish on what works.

Including the Claude Code v2 experience in VSCode.

Thank you, whoever added the setting to revert back to the terminal experience.

Re: Claude Code gets native LSP support

#319

Post by maccard »

qiine wrote: post #307
shimman wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is something I notice often when using these tools (if this is what you are referring too). Like they will grep entire code bases to search for a word rather than search by symbol. I suppose they don't care to fix these types of things as it all adds up to paid tokens in the end. We have 50 years worth of progress on top of grep and grep is one of the worse ways to refactor a system. Nice to see LLM companies ar…

> grep is one of the worse ways to refactor Hum? care to explain this?

Using Grep or regex is textual refactoring. If you want to rename every reference to a type Foo, how do you is that without touching any variables named foo, or any classes named FooBar

The answer is use tools that have semantic info to rename things.

Re: Claude Code gets native LSP support

#320

Post by lowsong »

raincole wrote: post #268
spullara wrote: post #31

I really can't understand why JetBrains hasn't integrated its refactoring tools into the AI system. Really missed the boat on making their platform transformational for AI coding. Imagine how much smaller the context would be for a tool that renames a function than editing hundreds of files. This LSP support is a good start but without the mutation functions it is still pretty lackluster. Plus LSPs aren't as good as…

It's interesting that everyone is saying "please don't shove AI down our throat!". But when a company actually takes this approach (JetBrains IDEs treat AI just as a tool at the sidebar), everyone is like "JetBrains is doomed because it's not agent-native enough."

They've tried to play it both ways. Not AI enough for the AI fanboys, but want to keep a toe in there for everyone else. They'd be better placed rejecting AI entirely, and then when the bubble pops they'll be well positioned to sweep in and eat VSCode's lunch with a product that actually works.
Post reply on HN