This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2022-06-30
Channels
- # announcements (40)
- # babashka (41)
- # beginners (32)
- # calva (15)
- # clara (8)
- # clj-kondo (14)
- # cljs-dev (30)
- # clojure (37)
- # clojure-dev (8)
- # clojure-europe (21)
- # clojure-norway (21)
- # clojure-uk (4)
- # clojured (3)
- # clojurescript (4)
- # community-development (10)
- # core-async (13)
- # cursive (23)
- # datomic (15)
- # emacs (9)
- # fulcro (3)
- # google-cloud (4)
- # graphql (24)
- # gratitude (2)
- # holy-lambda (4)
- # honeysql (5)
- # hyperfiddle (9)
- # keechma (1)
- # klipse (5)
- # lsp (23)
- # malli (4)
- # missionary (32)
- # pathom (28)
- # re-frame (2)
- # reagent (40)
- # reitit (17)
- # releases (2)
- # remote-jobs (1)
- # shadow-cljs (25)
- # specter (3)
- # vim (19)
- # xtdb (41)
I have a monorepo with common
, app1
and app2
the apps have in their dev profile all the source paths of common, but common has its own project.clj as well. Now if I open a clj file in common it doesn’t consider references in the apps for any var. How should that be configured?
Ideally I think I would like to just have a single lsp for the whole monorepo that adds all the source paths of common and the apps
you can use :source-paths
in .lsp/config.edn
Not sure about the mono repo but for common you could add "../app1/src", etc
actually, it worked when I just put a .lsp/config.edn
that lists all (common and apps) source paths in there…
you could try :source-aliases
as well if you have aliases in your root project.clj that consider the source-paths of common
Hi folks. Why is this x 51
showing up in the code action name?
All the ’add require` actions started having those numbers after a recent update :thinking_face:
(I’m using eglot, if that matters).
Got it. To be honest, I don’t see how this info is useful in this context :thinking_face:
sometimes you can have multiple suggestions for the same alias when your project is using different alias for same namespace, so it's nice to know there are 40 using foo
but only 2 using foob
for example
yeah, but I agree that it'd be more useful only for those cases, not sure how hard would be though to know when it's one of those cases
Ot, if it’s too hard, maybe changing how it’s displayed. Something like ‘51 alias occurrences’
counter point: it’s nice to confirm that lsp is aware of the common alias and is using the same one. Big fan of this
I use this feature all the time. It's really helpful to keep consistent aliases when working in a big codebase
x51 seemed obvious to me and very useful
(used: 51)
may be more universally understood