chalk VS eglot

The Rust compiler uses a Prolog-like query language internally for type checking generic requirements and traits: https://github.com/rust-lang/chalk

rust-analyzer already uses chalk (https://github.com/rust-lang/chalk) which should replace the current trait resolver.

Well it's quite easy to come to that conclusion: The code compiles with rustc, which is currently the reference implementation. If rust-analyzer does not match rustc's behavior it's an issue in their implementation. That written it's not that easy to fix as it's related to how rust-analyzer resolves types/traits. rust-analyzer uses chalk for this, which is known to be incomplete/diverging from the RFC'ed behavior. Now one could argue that we can simplify diesel to the point where it works will with rust-analyzer/chalk, but that would result in basically removing core diesel features that exist way longer than rust-analyzer.

> Not all of those things work well in the real world. E.g. logic programming (prolog) is cool but ultimately never really caught on.

It does have its niches though. For example, there is a trait solver for Rust called Chalk that uses a Prolog-inspired language because trait bounds basically define a logic:

https://github.com/rust-lang/chalk

Maybe something in the prolog/datalog direction could be useful? Notably Rust has Chalk to help with trait resolution ("Chalk is a library that implements the Rust trait system, based on Prolog-ish logic rules.")

There has been work to implement part of the Rust typing logic in the Chalk Engine which uses a prolog-ish syntax to describe its rules.

That's something Chalk is trying to tackle.

We probably will see all of them at some point -- polonius is a current effort to make the borrow checker accept more valid programs, in a way that also simplifies the logic and is probably a bit faster than the current NLL system, chalk is an attempt to do a similar thing for the trait system, and cranelift is a project that seeks to replace the LLVM codegen backend. But obviously, these are very large and complex projects that are gonna take some time.

Do Rust developers realize that? Oh, yes, absolutely, that's why we have this:

For me an attempt to write where HashMap: FromIterator and then use new and insert was totally bizzare because currently rustc is pretty primitive and doesn't do super-complex machinery needed to do what you want. Chalk may fix that one day, but it's nowhere near to being ready for inclusion into rustc thus I wouldn't even attempt to do what you tried to do… but that's not something you are supposed to know before reading this book!

Recently I stumbled upon this issue:

https://github.com/joaotavora/eglot/discussions/1127

I don't know enough about emacs and LSP to see the full picture, but it seems that both eglot's and corfu's maintainers, assumably very competent programmers, can't find a solution for this.

I only skimmed the thread. My understanding is that LSP dumps a long list of completion candidates at once and they can't decide a cache strategy that works well with existing code...?

It could be. There are unfixed issues with eglot and corfu, and sadly not a lot of willingness to investigate.

Eglot errors when I add new Python code blocks. The error disappears when I reconnect the language server, but the same happens again when I add a new code block. My "workaround" now is that before I start working on the .qmd file, I just add a bunch of Python code blocks (for which I also have a function) and then reconnect the language server again. This way I can start working for a while until I need to add more code blocks again.

This discussion has helped with some performance issues: https://github.com/joaotavora/eglot/discussions/993.

I guess eglot doesn't support it yet: https://github.com/joaotavora/eglot/pull/839

This is not by pure chance, João is the developer of the Eglot LSP client and the breadcrumbs from LSP-mode had been requested as a feature, but as far as I remember João thought rightfully that this could be an independent package, see https://github.com/joaotavora/eglot/discussions/988

A substantial section of the community is using corfu instead of company, but I wouldn't say company is out of date by any means. In emacs 29 eglot will be a built in, which might act as a replacement for lsp-mode depending on what functionality you need.

I am currently running emacs 29 (built from emacs-29 branch) which – according to https://github.com/joaotavora/eglot – should contain the latest eglot.

Yep. You can use flymake or flycheck for that in combination with eglot or lsp-mode.

See https://github.com/joaotavora/eglot#diagnostics

(I have reported this (that is, ElDoc missing docs for callable things at point, when Eglot is enabled) as an issue recently: First on GitHub-discussions https://github.com/joaotavora/eglot/discussions/1200, then on Debbugs https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=62687. But the threads are very long, so I don't recommend reading them.)