-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.4k
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
Fix Lsp Symbol Rename Bug #1046
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Revert changes to lockfile pls, update in separate PR
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, but I might give @leviathanbeak the chance to give this a tick in case there was some reason for make_range_end_inclusive
I'm overlooking.
Also it looks like the lock file update isn't necessary to land this right? If that's the case, are we able to remove that commit? I think the general approach for maintaining the lock file is to only update if it is strictly necessary for the PR to work (e.g. new dependencies were introduced or some critical bug was patched) or the PR itself is for a dedicated update of all dependencies. Otherwise it's a bit too easy to run into lots of unrelated conflicts between PRs.
0ef4ef9
to
c7a42ce
Compare
Ok cool, make sense. I'll omit the lock file in future PR's unless it is necessary for the PR to work. @leviathanbeak not sure why this function was once needed? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
utACK, would like @leviathanbeak to weigh in too
@JoshuaBatty I don't remember exactly for renaming, but I know for example when hovering over symbols there was a "off by 1" bug, where you would hover over the last character and you would not get anything so I added +1. So I probably added +1 to the rename range when I shouldn't, if this fix passes all the possible scenarios:
then I guess it's fine :) |
Is this good to go? Seems like everybody is happy with it and it has been 7 days since last activity. cc @JoshuaBatty @adlerjohn @mitchmindtree |
Sorry, have been sick so haven't had a chance to double-check what Elvis recommended, going to do that now and finish this PR off. |
c7a42ce
to
ad6ef21
Compare
This should be good to go now, have double-checked it passes the scenarios that Elvis brought up. |
closes #1042