Various fixes to progress handling #539
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
I'm actually unsure if we want to encourage people to use client-initiated progress, since I'm unsure if it allows cancelling properly: microsoft/language-server-protocol#1873 |
michaelpj
force-pushed
the
mpj/fix-progress
branch
2 times, most recently
from
35e1fb4 to
785bb9e
Compare
|
Okay, I'm going to make it off by default since it's not clear how this will all work. |
1. Server-initiated progress should wait for the client to acknowledge This is an old bug. Per the spec, we're not allowed to send any reports using the token if the client doesn't respond with a non-error response to our creation of the token. This is a bit subtle, because it means we may need to delay the sending of the "begin" notification until we have received the token from the client. 2. No easy way to use client-initiated progress This is simpler and faster than server-initiated progress since you don't need the extra message round-trip. You just need to pull out the progress token (if there is one) from the request and use that. I did two things to make this better: - The progress functions now take the client token if there is one. If there isn't one they still fall back to server-initiated progress. - The server capabilities can now advertise that client-initiated progress is supported.
michaelpj
force-pushed
the
mpj/fix-progress
branch
from
b9e68ff to
b6e09c2
Compare
michaelpj
force-pushed
the
mpj/fix-progress
branch
from
ddd9a98 to
fa0f67f
Compare
|
I added some more tests that actually exercise a bunch of the cases, so we can be a bit more confident that this works, hopefully. |
soulomoon
pushed a commit
to soulomoon/lsp
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 8, 2024
* Various fixes to progress handling 1. Server-initiated progress should wait for the client to acknowledge This is an old bug. Per the spec, we're not allowed to send any reports using the token if the client doesn't respond with a non-error response to our creation of the token. This is a bit subtle, because it means we may need to delay the sending of the "begin" notification until we have received the token from the client. 2. No easy way to use client-initiated progress This is simpler and faster than server-initiated progress since you don't need the extra message round-trip. You just need to pull out the progress token (if there is one) from the request and use that. I did two things to make this better: - The progress functions now take the client token if there is one. If there isn't one they still fall back to server-initiated progress. - The server capabilities can now advertise that client-initiated progress is supported. * Make the default for client-initiated progress to be off * Don't lose progress updates if it takes a while to start * Refactor tests * Add test for cancellation * Fix minor bug in lsp-test config handling * More tests * Try this * Fix formatting * Add comment and purge traces
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is an old bug. Per the spec, we're not allowed to send any reports using the token if the client doesn't respond with a non-error response to our creation of the token.
This is a bit subtle, because it means we may need to delay the sending of the "begin" notification until we have received the token from the client.
This is simpler and faster than server-initiated progress since you don't need the extra message round-trip. You just need to pull out the progress token (if there is one) from the request and use that.
I did two things to make this better: