This means no more bug reports from me about Neovim's LSP client.

Released 2021.04.23-15.49.47 : • Improve resolve-macro-as command to check and log if couldn't resolve the macro (c/c @brandon.ringe) • Improve workspace symbol filtering/searching. Now, the sole candidates shown are guaranteed to include all the characters contained in the filter/search string. (kudos to @nicdaoraf) • Add more tokens to semantic tokens: keywords, functions/var usages, java classes, local variables • Bump Graalvm from 21.0.0 to 21.1.0 • Bump clj-kondo to 2021.04.23 fixing some keywords corner cases.

Sorry if I am not finding this in the docs, but is it currently possible to configure navigation on macros that register keywords (e.g. re-frame/dispatch)? I know this is in the works on Kondo, but remember that it used to be achievable with the old :macro-defs init option

@mitchell_clojure I think it's still waiting on kondo's issue to be fixed for this

For now you can just list all keyword references

Yes, there is no way to achieve that ATM

Thanks fellas, sorry to bother

no problem, the only keyword that will work for this ATM is the (s/def ::some-key 1)

Interesting

I think we can just bake in some support for this for re-frame since it's so widely used

same as we did as with spec

one of the problems might be that you can use the same keyword to def multiple things: subscriptions, events, ...?

yes, good point

whereas with spec it's always just one thing

maybe correlate the keyword with the macro?

::foo for a subscription is not the same for ::foo for a event, etc

I can do a quick spot test on the app I have open to see if it yells at me for trying that. I don't think it is typical usage, regardless (although it is good to have all the corner cases covered)

I made that proposal here: https://github.com/clj-kondo/clj-kondo/issues/1211

Just add a :context re-frame/ref-foo-bar symbol or something, but I don't know

Right now we have this:

:def: can be added by :hooks using clj-kondo.hook-api/reg-keyword! to indicate a registered definition location for the keyword. Can be truthy, either true or the fully qualified call that registered it.

but that can work if you return a :def re-frame/ref-foo-bar right?

the issue is that we only return ATM a :def clojure.core.spec

@ericdallo that can work indeed, but it's :def that is bothering me, the name never sounded right to me

ah ok, that's I agree, maybe :defined-by

but you don't define a keyword....

this is why I proposed :context ...

which is maybe meaningless enough ;)

but this doesn't differentiate between "defs" and "refs" right?

you don't define, but it's the keyword name that is used to define a var-definition

var-...?

We can stick with :def and add maybe :ref for functions that refer to "defined" keywords. Like re-frame/subscribe

if that is useful for LSP

so you can have (s/valid? ::foobar ...) which gives :ref ::foobar so you know that foobar is being referenced?

yes, with that clojure-lsp would know that keyword has a "definition"

yes, but we will keep the :def for the definition, right?

ok let's just add it then and keep :def, naming is ff-ing hard

In #babashka I'm also thinking for hours now about the name for a new function...

Let me ask it here before you read it there.

How would you call a function to copy a file foo/bar/baz.txt into a directory quux/dir so you get quux/dir/baz.txt. copy is already taken.

and please also describe the argument order

What does copy do?

copy only copies one file (not dir) to another file (not dir)

clone 😆?

Not to derail, but re-frame does let you overload an id (register a single keyword as an event, effect, coeffect, and/or sub). Additionally, an id does not necessarily have to be a keyword. The re-frame registry re-frame.registry/kind->id->handler is just a map where you can look up what is registered to any value

Can’t copy be made to copy to a dir if that is the second arg?

Like cp works, in the shell. (I admit I might be missing context here.)

@pez I think you're right. babashka.fs is based on java.nio.file but we might be more relaxed... and just do it.

I have zero experience of java.nio.file so that might be the context I am missing. 😃

Neither have I.

I just wrote a Clojure wrapper so I don't have to deal with it ;)

Haha

ok, sorry for hijacking, let's continue with #lsp

Before I stop participating in the hijacking, I want to say this: I love the wrapper.