internal: document hypothetical completion problem

This commit is contained in:
Aleksey Kladov 2021-04-05 16:27:45 +03:00
parent c2be91dcd8
commit 1f00191de2

View File

@ -106,6 +106,34 @@
/// `foo` *should* be present among the completion variants. Filtering by
/// identifier prefix/fuzzy match should be done higher in the stack, together
/// with ordering of completions (currently this is done by the client).
///
/// # Hypothetical Completion Problem
///
/// There's a curious unsolved problem in the current implementation. Often, you
/// want to compute completions on a *slightly different* text document.
///
/// In the simplest case, when the code looks like `let x = `, you want to
/// insert a fake identifier to get a better syntax tree: `let x = complete_me`.
///
/// We do this in `CompletionContext`, and it works OK-enough for *syntax*
/// analysis. However, we might want to, eg, ask for the type of `complete_me`
/// variable, and that's where our current infrastructure breaks down. salsa
/// doesn't allow such "phantom" inputs.
///
/// Another case where this would be instrumental is macro expansion. We want to
/// insert a fake ident and re-expand code. There's `expand_hypothetical` as a
/// work-around for this.
///
/// A different use-case is completion of injection (examples and links in doc
/// comments). When computing completion for a path in a doc-comment, you want
/// to inject a fake path expression into the item being documented and complete
/// that.
///
/// IntelliJ has CodeFragment/Context infrastructure for that. You can create a
/// temporary PSI node, and say that the context ("parent") of this node is some
/// existing node. Asking for, eg, type of this `CodeFragment` node works
/// correctly, as the underlying infrastructure makes use of contexts to do
/// analysis.
pub fn completions(
db: &RootDatabase,
config: &CompletionConfig,