zf VS trouble.nvim

You can absolutely make CLI tools, but be prepared for breaking changes in the language with every release. I've been working on a fuzzy finder zf for a couple of years now, and with each Zig release there are a few things to fix. It's not a ton of work, but it is something to be aware of.

I’ve absolutely had satisfaction with my several personal projects written in Zig. And based on an imperfect measurement (GitHub stars) I have also had moderate success in making something useful. It’s a terminal fuzzy finder [0]. I also maintain a Zig Lua bindings package [1], and I’m working on a port of an old Macintosh game [2].

Zig is exactly what I want out of a language though, so take my opinion with a grain of salt :)

[0]: https://github.com/natecraddock/zf

[1]: https://github.com/natecraddock/ziglua

[2]: https://github.com/natecraddock/open-reckless-drivin

This looks awesome! As someone who is already pretty invested in trouble.nvim and native integrations with Telescope and GitSigns (to name just two), what do you feel are the selling points? I wonder how you see integrations evolving too? In example, I use zf via telescope-zf-native.nvim over fzf and have had to do little to let other plugins fallback into that.

I have long preferred the strictness of the fzy algorithm over fzf for fuzzy finding both in my shell and in neovim. But there are things about fzy that have bothered me (like the inability to narrow down results with space-delimited query terms). So I have been working on zf and libzf (written in Zig if you care about that sort of thing) for the shell and integration with neovim.

Does anyone know if it's possible to copy the LSP diagnostics (which currently is being displayed using folke/trouble to the quickfix window?

A newbie here, I used jose-elias-alvarez/null-ls.nivm for diagnostics and formatting, but I recently discovered folke/trouble.nvim and for me, it seems like a better option However, I don't know if it supports formatting and linting, I don't even know if it is an alternative to null-ls. So I need your help, can trouble.nvim replace null-ls? If not, can I use both of them simultaneously?

Trouble

Looking at the screenshot here for example https://github.com/folke/trouble.nvim they show errors both in the gutter and underlined.

All you need is just the LSP working (with linter, formatter and diagnostics) and telescope. Seriously, telescope is the GOAT, way faster than a file tree, you end up using the filetree only to move, create and delete files/folders but if it's just for that, you might as well use the terminal instead. For the LSP, it's not only autocompletion and hints at hover but formatting and diagnostics. I use lsp-zero + null-ls + trouble. I exposed all of the keybindings on those so I can at least open my own configs for guidance. Oh yeah, having treesitter is probably a must too, and it has no keybindings on its base form.

I am referring this as well as this this plugin.

Trouble: https://github.com/folke/trouble.nvim

Trouble is so good for finding errors easily. For testing I use jest so I haven't had too many issues. What do you test with?

I like trouble.nvim

I guess LazyVim uses https://github.com/folke/trouble.nvim for it. I should config it to not including errors regarding standardization.