We need to jump through a few extra hoops when the SourceKit plugin is located in SourceKit-LSP’s build folder and we are using `sourcekitd_plugin_initialize` instead of `sourcekitd_plugin_initialize_2`.
This adds a sourcekitd plugin that drives the code completion requests. It also includes a `CompletionScoring` module that’s used to rank code completion results based on their contextual match, allowing us to show more relevant code completion results at the top.
We made quite a few fixes recently to make sure that path handling works correctly using `URL` on Windows. Use `URL` in most places to have a single type that represents file paths instead of sometimes using `AbsolutePath`.
While doing so, also remove usages of `TSCBasic.FileSystem` an `InMemoryFileSystem`. The pattern of using `InMemoryFileSystem` for tests was never consistently used and it was a little confusing that some types took a `FileSystem` parameter while other always assumed to work on the local file system.
Fixes all build warnings in SourceKit-LSP so that it builds without any issues using recent Swift development snapshots (`swift-DEVELOPMENT-SNAPSHOT-2024-07-22-a` and `swift-6.0-DEVELOPMENT-SNAPSHOT-2024-07-24-a`)
Change a l public declarations to the `package` access level, accept for:
- The `LanguageServerProtocol` module
- The `BuildServerProtocol` module
- `InProcessClient.InProcessSourceKitLSPClient`
- `LanguageServerProtocolJSONRPC` (I would like to create a more ergonomic API for this like `InProcessSourceKitLSPClient` in the future, but for now, we’ll leave it public)
Unfortunately, our pattern of marking functions as `@_spi(Testing) public` no longer works with the `package` access level because declarations at the `package` access level cannot be marked as SPI. I have decided to just mark these functions as `package`. Alternatives would be:
- Add an underscore to these functions, like we did for functions exposed for testing before the introduction of `SPI`
- Use `@testable` import in the test targets and mark the methods as `internal`
Resolves#1315
rdar://128295618
The purpose of the different modules wasn’t clearly defined, which lead to inconsistent responsibilities between the different modules. Define each module’s purpose and move a few files between modules to satisfy these definitions.
There are a few more larger changes that will need to be made for a fully consistent module structure. These are FIXMEs in the new Modules.md document and I’ll address them in follow-up PRs.
Turns out that sourcekitd test hooks were a bad idea because of the following comment that I wrote:
```
`testHooks` are only considered when an instance is being created. If a sourcekitd instance at the given path already exists, its test hooks will be used.
```
During test execution in Xcode, we generate a bunch of `SourceKitServer` instances in the same process that all call `DynamicallyLoadedSourceKitD.getOrCreate`. Now, if `testDontReturnEmptyDiagnosticsIfDiagnosticRequestIsCancelled` is not the first test being executed in the process (which usually it is not), the test hooks in it won’t get used.
Switch back to using the preparation hooks, essentially reverting https://github.com/apple/sourcekit-lsp/pull/1412 and keeping the following snippet to fix the underlying issue
```swift
// Poll until the `CancelRequestNotification` has been propagated to the request handling.
for _ in 0..<Int(defaultTimeout * 100) {
if Task.isCancelled {
break
}
usleep(10_000)
}
```
I saw a few non-deterministic test failures. I think the issue was that handling of the `CancelRequestNotification` is done asynchronously, which left a short window in which the sourcekitd diagnostics request could run and return results instead of being cancelled. Wait for the diagnostic request to actually be cancelled before running it for real.
While doing this, also introduce proper sourcekitd test hooks instead of relying on the preparation test hooks, which just got run as a side effect.
I saw a failure in CI where a sourcekitd diagnostic request got cancelled without an LSP cancellation request. I am suspecting that there is some implicit cancellation going on in sourcekitd despite `key.cancel_builds: 0`, which doesn’t make sense to me. Adding some explicit logging to sourcekit-lsp to check if we cancel the request for some reason.
