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

feat: go to implementation/references/declaration/type definition with menu #291

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 29, 2024

Conversation

angelozerr
Copy link
Contributor

@angelozerr angelozerr commented May 15, 2024

feat: go to implementation/references/declaration/type definition with menu

image

image

image

Copy link

codecov bot commented May 15, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 5.38721% with 281 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 21.83%. Comparing base (f1fe13c) to head (e9a8984).

Current head e9a8984 differs from pull request most recent head 091499d

Please upload reports for the commit 091499d to get more accurate results.

Files Patch % Lines
...evtools/lsp4ij/features/AbstractLSPGoToAction.java 0.00% 44 Missing ⚠️
...ij/features/declaration/LSPDeclarationSupport.java 2.85% 34 Missing ⚠️
...tures/implementation/LSPImplementationSupport.java 2.85% 34 Missing ⚠️
...tures/typeDefinition/LSPTypeDefinitionSupport.java 2.85% 34 Missing ⚠️
...sp4ij/features/references/LSPReferenceSupport.java 3.33% 29 Missing ⚠️
...features/declaration/LSPGoToDeclarationAction.java 0.00% 16 Missing ⚠️
...es/implementation/LSPGoToImplementationAction.java 0.00% 16 Missing ⚠️
...ij/features/references/LSPGoToReferenceAction.java 0.00% 16 Missing ⚠️
...es/typeDefinition/LSPGoToTypeDefinitionAction.java 0.00% 16 Missing ⚠️
...lsp4ij/features/references/LSPReferenceParams.java 0.00% 9 Missing ⚠️
... and 6 more
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #291      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   21.34%   21.83%   +0.49%     
==========================================
  Files         245      259      +14     
  Lines        8372     8655     +283     
  Branches     1548     1570      +22     
==========================================
+ Hits         1787     1890     +103     
- Misses       6249     6408     +159     
- Partials      336      357      +21     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@angelozerr angelozerr self-assigned this May 15, 2024
@angelozerr angelozerr force-pushed the go_to_implementation branch 10 times, most recently from 0b62a41 to 16fb8a5 Compare May 22, 2024 14:15
@angelozerr angelozerr changed the title feat: go to implementation with menu feat: go to implementation/references/declaration/type definition with menu May 22, 2024
@angelozerr angelozerr marked this pull request as ready for review May 22, 2024 15:37
@angelozerr angelozerr force-pushed the go_to_implementation branch 3 times, most recently from 5fcd727 to e9a8984 Compare May 22, 2024 16:48
@angelozerr angelozerr added this to the 0.0.2 milestone May 22, 2024
@angelozerr angelozerr requested a review from fbricon May 22, 2024 16:52
@@ -42,14 +42,13 @@ Current state of [Language Features]( https://microsoft.github.io/language-serve
* ✅ [completionItem/resolve](https://microsoft.github.io/language-server-protocol/specifications/lsp/3.17/specification/#completionItem_resolve) (see [implementation details](#completion-item-resolve))
* ✅ [textDocument/signatureHelp](https://microsoft.github.io/language-server-protocol/specifications/lsp/3.17/specification/#textDocument_signatureHelp) (see [implementation details](#signature-help))
* ✅ [textDocument/publishDiagnostics](https://microsoft.github.io/language-server-protocol/specifications/lsp/3.17/specification/#textDocument_publishDiagnostics) (see [implementation details](#publish-diagnostics))
* ✅ [textDocument/definition](https://microsoft.github.io/language-server-protocol/specifications/lsp/3.17/specification/#textDocument_definition)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why did you remove it? definition != type definition

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Indeed but I removed it to avoid having duplication

@angelozerr angelozerr merged commit e678103 into redhat-developer:main May 29, 2024
6 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Status: ✅ Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants