tailor VS tower-lsp

I'd also love some more diagnostics; things that you may get from flog or flay or rubocop (although I think integrating with rubocop would be ideal, given its influence on the ecosystem) or rails_best_practices (prior to rubocop, I actually tried making my own linter, tailor, but rubocop came along and was a million times better)...

I am using nom / nom_locate to build the parser side because I've done a handful of other projects with it, and I plan to use tower-lsp to hook up the language server side.

I realize this might not be for everyone, but I'm writing it in Rust using Lib-ruby-parser and tower-lsp: two existing libraries that handle a bunch of the heavy lifting for me. I'm more productive in Rust than with Ruby at this point, despite doing Ruby full time for 15 years, plus I really really don't want to have to deal with a slow LSP--that was the whome impetus for this project. I started in the spring, made a bunch of headway, then backtracked to redo the internals to make it easier to handle monkeypatching, overriding/redefining of methods, etc. across your project.

https://github.com/ebkalderon/tower-lsp is a generalized LSP implementation in a lower-level language (Rust) so you may get a better idea by reading through that repo. It seems that the server opens a TCP socket that the client later connects to, but I'm not really sure.

I was taking a look at the tower_lsp example here (https://github.com/ebkalderon/tower-lsp/blob/master/examples/stdio.rs) and had a question about how the document sync works between the client and the server.

Mine all use [tower-lsp](https://github.com/ebkalderon/tower-lsp/) for the LSP protocol stuff, and then either [Tree-sitter](https://github.com/tree-sitter/tree-sitter) or [Nom](https://github.com/Geal/nom). If I do another I'll probably try [Chumsky](https://github.com/zesterer/chumsky) which combines some of the advantages of both.