1. Rich Type Annotations #1335
Unanswered
pysan3
asked this question in
Internal Development
Replies: 1 comment 2 replies
-
This one is very simple: types are great! The only reason it does not have type already is that they either didn't exist or I didn't know about them when I started the project. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
2 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
Hi y'all,
I think I can start working on the big rewrite.
I am going to bring a huge diff to the codebase, so I'd like to ask your opinion first.
I will post my roadmaps here, separated by its topics.
I'd love to hear your feedbacks on each of the threads.
1. Rich Type Annotations
I see some type annotations added to the codebase recently, which is amazing.
I'd like to scan thru the codebase to define the fields for the
context
andstate
variable, which is used and passed everywhere, and many fields are added along the way. (Use---@class, ---@field
.)Also, add annotation and doc for the
default.lua
to give a better configuration experience. I see some complaints that neo-tree's config options are too complicated.2. Add Type Check Action
Ref: mrcjkb/lua-typecheck-action#34
After
1.
is done, we can check for type errors with GH actions for each PR, which makes it way easier to detect potential bugs.I started working: #1333
I also added
lua_ls-typecheck.yml
, which is configured to only check types ondefaults.lua
for now, and I will gradually make the list longer as I add the correct annotations.cc @cseickel
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions