Feature/nested-outline #593
Conversation
|
We're still missing is the foldable comment feature - I guess changes to multiple files are needed for this functionality and I'm afraid of writing something difficult for you to maintain in that case. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good first stab! This will be such a nice improvement.
Unfortunately we can't use unsafe code in this way, and especially not if safety is not established from a thorough analysis.
It seems it should be possible to move the comment section handling inside the loop over the children of a node. And swap out the current parent there depending on the level. Then you shouldn't need to pass this stack around and deal with the ensuing reference lifetime issues.
WDYT?
crates/ark/src/lsp/symbols.rs
Outdated
| // Check if the comment starts with one or more '#' followed by any text and ends with 4+ punctuations | ||
| if let Some((_level, title)) = parse_comment_as_section(&comment_text) { | ||
| // Create a symbol based on the parsed comment | ||
| if let Some((level, title)) = parse_comment_as_section(&comment_text) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
At this point it seems like this large handling block should become its own method, to keep index_node() readable.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree. I'm not sure what parameters we should pass to the new method. It seems that passing things around in Rust is not easy.
crates/ark/src/lsp/symbols.rs
Outdated
|
|
||
| // Push the new symbol to the current parent | ||
| if let Some((_, current_parent_ptr)) = section_stack.last() { | ||
| let current_parent = unsafe { &mut **current_parent_ptr }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We're going to have to find another way. I don't think we can afford unsafe sections in this code, and we haven't established safety here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You are right! Just didn't work out how to do it in a safe way.
I have moved the comment handling to the loop. Now it should look closer to our main version now. However, I'm still struggling to get around the "unsafe" problem. There remain 2 unsafe references. @lionel- any suggestions, feel free to overwrite my code? |
| return Ok(true); | ||
| // Push the new symbol to the current parent | ||
| if let Some((_, current_parent_ptr)) = section_stack.last() { | ||
| let current_parent = unsafe { &mut **current_parent_ptr }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
1st unsafe reference
| } | ||
| } else { | ||
| if let Some((_, current_parent_ptr)) = section_stack.last() { | ||
| let current_parent = unsafe { &mut **current_parent_ptr }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
2nd unsafe reference
|
Closed as refactored to #611. |
Fixes posit-dev/positron#3822.
With the following code:
The outline is now displayed as: