Provide next best definition when no exact match is present. - #807
Provide next best definition when no exact match is present.#807Moosieus wants to merge 6 commits into
Conversation
zachallaun
left a comment
zachallaun
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should also add some tests to ensure that, when multiple arities are available, it goes to the correct one. I.e. |some_call(1, 2) should go to some_call/1 if that's all that's there, but we should test that it still goes to some_call/2 if there's both an arity-1 and arity-2 definition.
|
I'll check on the test failure 🔎 Go-to-definition supports multiple results, so we could just show all arities and let users select one of them, rather than resolving to any specific one. If that's not preferable though, we can resolve to the lowest arity definition. LMK what you think and I'll amend things accordingly. |
* Prevent exact_lookup from returning private definitions for public calls. * Jump to lowest-arity in next best definition function.
|
Found this behavior which applies to main branch as well. Public calls to non-existent arities can jump to privately defined arities. This comes from both Lexical's existing ("exact") lookup, and elixir_sense. At the moment, I've filtered out private definitions for public calls on Lexical's lookup ("exact" + "nearest arity"), and left elixir_sense as-is. |
3 participants
Pursuant to #780