-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 417
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[LSP] Invalid returned CodeAction #2068
Comments
HI @CGNonofr The intent of 96600de was to workaround the issue where generating changesets for all the actions took too long on large projects. The design is such that we expect for the client to issue the The proper support for delayed code action resolution was added in 3.16#codeAction_resolve. We are waiting for the #2044 PR to be merged before we can start using it in |
Hi @razzmatazz It seems that not providing the |
I might not know the context, but I see the code is checking (short-circuiting) on the presence of the actual |
This function is not called if |
This feature was introduced in LSP 3.16.0 https://microsoft.github.io/language-server-protocol/specification#codeAction_resolve and allows us to drop the hack where we were introducing a special "omnisharp/executeCodeAction" command to delay the resolution of code action changesets until user actually selets that code action: see OmniSharp#1814. Related to: - OmniSharp#2068 - OmniSharp#1814
FYI @CGNonofr -- I have added a PR that does away with |
This feature was introduced in LSP 3.16.0 https://microsoft.github.io/language-server-protocol/specification#codeAction_resolve and allows us to drop the hack where we were introducing a special "omnisharp/executeCodeAction" command to delay the resolution of code action changesets until user actually selets that code action: see OmniSharp#1814. Related to: - OmniSharp#2068 - OmniSharp#1814
Thanks 👍 I'll give it a try! |
This feature was introduced in LSP 3.16.0 https://microsoft.github.io/language-server-protocol/specification#codeAction_resolve and allows us to drop the hack where we were introducing a special "omnisharp/executeCodeAction" command to delay the resolution of code action changesets until user actually selets that code action: see OmniSharp#1814. Related to: - OmniSharp#2068 - OmniSharp#1814
This feature was introduced in LSP 3.16.0 https://microsoft.github.io/language-server-protocol/specification#codeAction_resolve and allows us to drop the hack where we were introducing a special "omnisharp/executeCodeAction" command to delay the resolution of code action changesets until user actually selets that code action: see OmniSharp#1814. Related to: - OmniSharp#2068 - OmniSharp#1814
This feature was introduced in LSP 3.16.0 https://microsoft.github.io/language-server-protocol/specification#codeAction_resolve and allows us to drop the hack where we were introducing a special "omnisharp/executeCodeAction" command to delay the resolution of code action changesets until user actually selets that code action: see OmniSharp#1814. Related to: - OmniSharp#2068 - OmniSharp#1814
This feature was introduced in LSP 3.16.0 https://microsoft.github.io/language-server-protocol/specification#codeAction_resolve and allows us to drop the hack where we were introducing a special "omnisharp/executeCodeAction" command to delay the resolution of code action changesets until user actually selets that code action: see OmniSharp#1814. Related to: - OmniSharp#2068 - OmniSharp#1814
I just tried the v1.37.15 and the issue still doesn't seem to be fixed |
Here an example of a serialized
CodeAction
response provided by omnisharp-roslyn:Refering to the documentation,
edit
should either beundefined
or of typeWorkspaceEdit
but in the provided example, it's an empty object.
vscode then doesn't consider it as a
CodeAction
and then think it's a legacyCommand
instead of aCodeAction
, starting from here, nothing is workingIt seems related to
omnisharp-roslyn/src/OmniSharp.LanguageServerProtocol/Handlers/OmniSharpCodeActionHandler.cs
Line 102 in ebabfb8
In was probably broken in 96600de#diff-8b5480f9e5910e05693e4a02d4ab416f6b006ec30673dea7bc16e2b919ab9f37L97
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: