Apple's investment into Clangd and refactoring tooling
lists.llvm.org
Apple's investment into Clangd and refactoring tooling
1–10 of 83 posts
Re: Apple's investment into Clangd and refactoring tooling
#2Looking forward to it.
It is really nice to finally start having C++ environments close to the promise of Energize C++ and Visual Age C++ 4.
Re: Apple's investment into Clangd and refactoring tooling
#3I hope that it also means there will be Apple-provided LSP server for Swift soon.
Re: Apple's investment into Clangd and refactoring tooling
#4I'm glad to see that Apple is putting work into making their tooling better and easier to work with, but I'm still not clear on the benefits of this change. Would someone care to enlighten me? Currently, the benefits of libclang that I see are that I can easily drop it into a project without requiring a lot of dependencies, and I don't need to figure out how to get permission to run different processes and manage interprocess communication between them–if anyone doubts that this will be an issue, on iOS neither of these is really supported at all. In addition, I don't require a daemon to constantly be running to analyze my code. (Why is this bad? Take a look at Swift's sourcekitd.)
Re: Apple's investment into Clangd and refactoring tooling
#5I'm glad to see that Apple is putting work into making their tooling better and easier to work with, but I'm still not clear on the benefits of this change. Would someone care to enlighten me? Currently, the benefits of libclang that I see are that I can easily drop it into a project without requiring a lot of dependencies, and I don't need to figure out how to get permission to run different processes and manage int…
> if anyone doubts that this will be an issue, on iOS neither of these is really supported at all
What for you might need it on iOS? Server is meant to run on a development machine.
Re: Apple's investment into Clangd and refactoring tooling
#6I'm glad to see that Apple is putting work into making their tooling better and easier to work with, but I'm still not clear on the benefits of this change. Would someone care to enlighten me? Currently, the benefits of libclang that I see are that I can easily drop it into a project without requiring a lot of dependencies, and I don't need to figure out how to get permission to run different processes and manage int…
To be able use it from any editor that is able to understand LSP, instead of having everyone writing their own bindings to libclang, specially if the editors are written in type safe languages.
Re: Apple's investment into Clangd and refactoring tooling
#7Could someone explain what's the difference between both approaches and what are the advantages of Clangd?
Re: Apple's investment into Clangd and refactoring tooling
#8I'm assuming this is the "LSP" discussed? https://microsoft.github.io/language-server-protocol/
Mapping json-rpc onto xpc... Sure why not
Re: Apple's investment into Clangd and refactoring tooling
#9I'm glad to see that Apple is putting work into making their tooling better and easier to work with, but I'm still not clear on the benefits of this change. Would someone care to enlighten me? Currently, the benefits of libclang that I see are that I can easily drop it into a project without requiring a lot of dependencies, and I don't need to figure out how to get permission to run different processes and manage int…
I'm no expert, but one major distinction I can see is that libclang would be used in (editor) process, and a clangd server would operate outside the editor process and communicate over a protocol with the editor.
Re: Apple's investment into Clangd and refactoring tooling
#10There is an article from 2010 titled "Emacs is dead" that is being reposted on HN from time to time. The author args that the greatness of Emacs is to rely on external, editor agnostic tools where text act as an universal interface/medium but that the practice is fading out, and thus the dead of Emacs. Now, ten years later, Apple announces this. Emacs, the undead?