Support structured diagnostics 2 #4433
Conversation
We're leaving the TODOs for either later in this PR or in another PR
This reverts commit 4fed987.
Had to move `attachReason` between modules to achieve this, which is fine because it was never exported from its own module.
stylish-haskell does not handle CPP pragmas very well, is this a regression?
noughtmare
requested review from
0rphee,
santiweight,
eddiemundo,
fendor and
wz1000
as code owners
|
All failures in the jobs of e651d41 seem to be spurious (except for the stylish-haskell formatting failure). |
|
I think the remaining failures are not caused by this PR. Are these kinds of spurious failures common in HLS? Also, I would really like to get this merged before the next release, because I want to develop a VS Code extension which uses these diagnostic numbers. |
Yes, they unfortunately are |
|
Some errors in ghc |
|
You're right. Can anyone give me some tips on how to profile HLS to see where these timeouts are coming from? |
|
@noughtmare Profiling is likely not necessary, I think the tests are waiting for an LSP message that never arrives, and then just wait for 60s and time out. Use |
|
Ah, I was thinking there was some inefficiency somewhere that only GHC 9.6 and later could properly optimize. However, I think you're suggesting an alternative explanation: that one of the conditional CPP blocks contains an actual correctness issue. Perhaps I could just visually inspect those first; I don't think that would be that much work. Edit: no obvious loops or anything, so perhaps some tracing would indeed be better. |
|
|
||
| #if MIN_VERSION_ghc(9,6,1) | ||
| pattern PFailedWithErrorMessages :: forall a b. (b -> Bag (MsgEnvelope GhcMessage)) -> ParseResult a | ||
| #elif MIN_VERSION_ghc(9,3,0) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
TODO: make this the fallthrough case, we don't support GHC versions below 9.4 any more.
This is my attempt at finishing the work of @dylan-thinnes on !4311.
Addresses #2014
Should hopefully enable #3246