infernu VS language-server-protocol

Or maybe a sound type system can only be achieved either by limiting JavaScript or with a different language that compiles to JavaScript?

Very constrained. Since "constraints liberate, liberties constrain", as Bjarnason said. Inspired by Golang's minimalism, and Elm's guardrails. For learnability and maintainability. Since discipline doesn't scale (obligatory xkcd: with too much power, and the wrong nudges, all it takes is a moment of laziness/crunch-time to corrupt a strong foundation), and a complex language affords nerd-sniping kinds of puzzles, and bikeshedding and idiomatic analysis-paralysis. Counter-inspired by Haskell. The virtue of functional programming is that it subtracts features that are too-powerful/footguns (compared to OOP), namely: mutation & side-effects. The language designers should take care of and standardize all the idiomacy (natural modes of expression in the language). "Inside every big ugly language there is a small beautiful language trying to come out." -- sinelaw. The language should assume the developer is an unexperienced, lazy, (immediately) forgetful, and habitual creature. As long as software development is done by mere humans. This assumption sets the bar (the worst case), and is a good principle for DX, as well as UX. The constrained nature of the language should allow for quick learning and proficiency. Complexity should lie in the system and domain, not the language. When the language restricts what can be done, it's easier to understand what was done (a smaller space of possibilities reduces ambiguity and increases predictability, which gives speed for everyone, at a small initial learning cost). The language should avoid Pit of Despair programming, and leave the programmer in the Pit of Success: where its rules encourage you to write correct code in the first place. Inspired by Eric Lippert, but also by Rust.

But these are typically filling the usecases of productivity applications, not ‘engines’.

Microsoft Word doesn’t run its grammar checker as an external service and shunt JSON over a localhost socket to get spelling and style suggestions.

Photoshop doesn’t install a background service to host filters.

The closest pattern I can think of is the ‘language servers’ model used by IDEs to handle autosuggest - see https://microsoft.github.io/language-server-protocol/ - but the point of that is to enable many to many interop - multiple languages supporting multiple IDEs. Is that the expected usecase for local language assistants and image generators?

If you tried writing code like the one above, your Rust LSP should already be telling you that what you're doing is unacceptable:

A language server is an external program that follows the Language Server Protocol. The LSP specification defines what type of messages a language server can receive, and also how it should respond. The idea here is that any tool that follows the LSP specification can communicate with a language server.

> There's a strange dance of IDEs coming and going, with their idiosyncracies and partial plugins.

The Language Server Protocol [1] is the best thing to happen to text editors. Any editor that speaks it gets IDE features. Now if only they'd adopt the Debug Adapter Protocol [2]...

[1] https://microsoft.github.io/language-server-protocol/

[2] https://microsoft.github.io/debug-adapter-protocol/

The Gno Language Server (gnols) is an implementation of the Language Server Protocol (LSP) for the Gno programming language. It is similar to the equivalent “gopls” project for Go, as they can be plugged into your code editor through extensions and allow you to access handy features, such as autocompletion, formatting, and compile-time warnings/errors. Gnols makes writing code simpler, working with several editors to suit your preferences. To try it out, visit the CONTRIBUTING.md file, which contains instructions to get you started. Our current documentation targets Vim, Neovim, and SublimeText, but can likely be used with any editor that supports LSP. Feel free to contribute to improving Gnols and adding more features. It’s well-written, and simple to dive into the code and add more capabilities.

Honestly, you should read some of the docs [0] if these are the sorts of questions you're asking.

[0] https://microsoft.github.io/language-server-protocol/

hey HN. this is a Language Server[0] designed specifically for Postgres. A language server adds features to IDEs (VSCode, NeoVim, etc) - features like auto-complete, go-to-definition, or documentation on hover, etc.

there have been previous some attempts at adding Postgres support to code editors. usually these attempts implement a generic SQL parser and then offer various "flavours" of SQL.

This attempt is different because it uses the actual Postgres parser to do the heavy-lifting. This is done via libg_query, an excellent C library for accessing the PostgreSQL parser outside of the server. We feel this is a better approach because it gives developers 100% confidence in the parser, and it allows us to keep up with the rapid development of Postgres.

this is still in early development, and mostly useful for testers/collaborators. the majority of work is still ahead, but we've verified that the approach works. we're making it public now so that we can develop it in the open with input from the community.

a lot of the credit belongs to pganalyze[1] for their work on libg_query, and to psteinroe (https://github.com/psteinroe) who the creator and maintainer of the LSP.

[0] LSP: https://microsoft.github.io/language-server-protocol/

[1] pganalyze: https://pganalyze.com/

See: https://github.com/microsoft/language-server-protocol/issues/1164

The nxls is a language server based on the Language Server Protocol (LSP) and acts as the “brain” of Nx Console. It analyzes your Nx workspace and provides information on it, including code completion and more.

LSP stands for "Language Server Protocol", which defines how a language server and an editor (client) can communicate to provide code navigation, completion, etc. (source). Traditional IDE's would have something similar to this baked-in already, but proprietary to their software/language; whereas LSP is an open standard, so anything could implement it.