Missing type definitions compared to protocol specs

[sansmoraxz]

Client definitions are missing

A lot of pydantic definitions are missing viz capabilities. Having to pass in explicit dicts are tedious and error prone.

Microsoft maintains a library called lsprotocol.

The python definitions here are complete but are based on attrs.

[sansmoraxz]

We have options:

• Option 1: We include the library as a dependency.
• Option 2: We modify their code generator to generate pydantic classes.
• Option 3: We have compatibility for both attrs and pydantic. The lsprotocol will be an optional dependency.

[sansmoraxz]

@yeger00 thoughts?

[yeger00]

I don't mind adding the library as a depndency but I don't really like to support attrs.
I didn't fully understand option #2 - how do you think to implement this?

[sansmoraxz]

About the option 2:

The ground source of what the specs are is actually maintained here:

https://github.com/microsoft/lsprotocol/blob/47c83d89bcfe876cd0cd021a15f408bdea2e5cce/generator/lsp.json

If we have a parser to generate pydantic schemas, the maintenance of this project can be synced with core specs faster.

Have a baseline here (incomplete though):
https://gist.github.com/sansmoraxz/037f057b5551468b3f487a56ed96e4f9