-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 53
nixd/tools/nixd-attrset-eval: support completion for "builtins" #620
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
Conversation
|
@inclyc did you request my review for something specific or more for a general review? |
A specific review for C++ nix IPC: This pull request introduces the ability to query Very appreciated if you can take a look :) |
|
It looks reasonable to me and similar to what the nix repl does for completing. However I would prefer if @roberth would have a look as well. |
|
|
||
| /// \brief Get nix's `builtins` constant | ||
| inline nix::Value &getBuiltins(const nix::EvalState &State) { | ||
| return *State.baseEnv.values[0]; |
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.
I would do add a TODO now that this could use the proper api in the next nix version.
|
Hey! Checking in here. What all needs to be done to get this working? More than happy to get the ball rolling assuming I can be of any help. |
Actually, this PR is related to the technical approach of #625. I’m considering proposing a technical solution that would work well for both #625 and this PR, but I haven’t had the time to write the code recently. If you’re interested, you could explore the connection between the technical approaches of these two PRs and help move this work forward. |
Basic support for option completion on the worker process. This is the premise for doing this in LSP.
Co-authored-by: Jörg Thalheim <[email protected]>
24792c1 to
af12b9c
Compare
|
Rebased. Resolving merge conflicts. |
|
Closed, prefer #677 |
Basic support for option completion on the worker process. This is the premise for doing this in LSP.
Link: #507