On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 08:08, Jaroslav Tulach <jaroslav.tul...@gmail.com> wrote: > Looks like the invention of LSP was really great move by the VSCode guys! It > allows each language to provide good enough IDE support by coding in the > language itself and writing the "server side" IDE piece while reusing > internals of own language compiler. No surprise everyone is providing LSP > servers.
Agreed! > > I remember > > talking with you at JCrete on this during early transition, and about > > the fact that the other, other VSCode LSP support was using it. > > The days where NetBeans could afford to support any language on the planet are > over. There is just a few of us and we don't have the momentum we used to have > in the first ten years of this century. In such situation re-using work done > by > others via LSP is the best option we have. In the bit you quoted I was meaning other consumers of nb-javac ... But in general, I think us embracing LSP as a server provider, and as a consumer for other languages is great. But I'm trying to ask whether we should be moving towards a position where *every* language in the IDE UI is supported by an LSP server, ours or someone else's? A *long term* goal to consume our own Java LSP server might, with limited resources, link ... > VSCode support is > important for OracleLabs strategy, it actually means quite a lot of > contributions from Sváťa, Dušan, Martin, me. ... even more into the IDE experience? I also mentioned re. nb-javac because the alternative if we can't rely on nb-javac as the single option in future to support developing JDK 19 while running on JDK 17 is surely along the lines of .. https://github.com/apache/netbeans/pull/1475 ? > > don't think it still is, maybe it could be encouraged back to it - an > > independent component that provides useful features for editors in > > general, and is consumed by other projects, is a good thing IMO! > > PS: Such an independent component would have to be built on top of `(nb)- > javac`. I don't understand how that would simplify the licensing or > distribution? As far as I can tell all the problems we are solving now would > remain the same. Again, it won't, because that bit was specifically talking about other consumers of nb-javac. Best wishes, Neil --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
