eclipse-lsp4e / eclipse-lsp4e/lsp4e
Why using LoggingStreamConnectionProviderProxy?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Java
- Stars
- 85
- Forks
- 69
- Avg merge
- 8h 33m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 6
Description
I'm implementing an LSP console in IJ by mimicing the LSP4E LoggingStreamConnectionProviderProxy, but the main problem with this code is that it doesn't format correctly the JSON request / responses / notfication like vscode does.
It is very hard to read messages and IMHO I think LSP4E should have the same format for LSP logs than vscode to provide teh capability to compare LSP traces between Eclipse IDE and vscode (I did that for IJ).
I wonder why we need LoggingStreamConnectionProviderProxy since we log the message here https://github.com/eclipse/lsp4e/blob/9f06f405409541d2015438a7e153ef674b30e85f/org.eclipse.lsp4e/src/org/eclipse/lsp4e/LanguageServerWrapper.java#LL281C6-L281C16. Calling message.toString() format correctly the LSP request / reponses / notification:
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with LoggingStreamConnectionProviderProxy and the logging call in org.eclipse.lsp4e/LanguageServerWrapper.java around line 281. Compare the current message.toString() output with the formatting shown for VS Code LSP traces, then clarify whether the proxy is still needed and what matching output should look like; the issue does not name a test.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- java
- Domain
- tooling
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100