rust-vfs VS rust-analyzer

Of course, that still leaves the door open for cases like accidentally starting the recursion for / -- if you're worried about that, then e.g. https://github.com/manuel-woelker/rust-vfs might come handy.

go build 3.62s user 0.76s system 171% cpu 2.545 total

I was looking forward to parallel front-end[4], but I have not seen any improvement for these small changes.

[1]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-analyzer

For example, intelephense can show diagnostics in real time, there is no need to save the file to get new diagnostics. But rust-analyzer, the language server for rust, can only update diagnostics after saving the file.

6. Rust Analyzer

The rust-analyzer readme suggests you go here for support request. But even there, you'll need to provide more details to get useful help.

For example: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-analyzer/blob/master/docs/...

> If you create an LSP, it will work best in VS Code.

Any editor can work just as well as (or even better than) VS Code.

So, apparently the reason why rust-analyzer, the LSP server for Rust does not have persistent caching is because it would make "optimizing initial passes less important".

All I want to know is: Will it have a build configuration pulldown?

I am not a Rust dev. It surely looks great.

However, from what I understand it seems to supply just a parser separate from the Rust compiler (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-analyzer/tree/master/crate...) trying to keep up with Rust‘s development. So, in principle, it could have been just another treesitter parser plugin, too.

So, again, the LSP framework does not directly provide any magical benefit over a static parsing framework. All the semantic analysis capabilities stem from a good parser.

rust-analyzer > manual > helix > binary > rustup component add rust-analyzer