Skip to content
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

ensure appropriate version of dotnet-interactive is present #396

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
May 9, 2020

Conversation

brettfo
Copy link
Member

@brettfo brettfo commented May 9, 2020

extension.ts will now ensure that an appropriate version of dotnet is installed, or else it will acquire one for the user. If one couldn't be acquired, it is a fatal error and nothing can be done.

A similar check is also done for dotnet-interactive, but it currently only continues if a valid version is present and errors otherwise. An upcoming PR will be to acquire a local tool version of it if necessary. If the appropriate version is not present, an error is shown in the bottom corner or the window:
image

The minimum good version of dotnet-interactive is the one with the recent hover text updates from a few days ago. That version has not yet been published to NuGet.org, so when we do publish again, it should be at least that version. A workaround is that all locally-built arcade versions of the tool are allowed (*-dev).

Also included are some other minor improvements like not returning from execute() until either CommandHandled or CommandFailed has returned. This makes the notebook UI in VS Code much nicer.

N.b., the changes to interactiveClient.ts are mostly whitespace, so disabling that in the GitHub view is recommended for that file.

@brettfo
Copy link
Member Author

brettfo commented May 9, 2020

@colombod I've added a dispose() method to KernelTransport so that the process can be killed when VS Code disposes the notebook.

@colombod colombod merged commit 5947b9d into dotnet:master May 9, 2020
@brettfo brettfo deleted the package-usability branch May 9, 2020 15:23
@jonsequitur jonsequitur mentioned this pull request May 12, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants