feat: add framework name to the test classes BSP request #1755
Conversation
kpodsiad
force-pushed
the
feat/scala-test-classes
branch
from
5786991 to
5b3d67a
Compare
kpodsiad
changed the title
|
Resolution is failing because |
kpodsiad
force-pushed
the
feat/scala-test-classes
branch
from
af28899 to
5f6e338
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@lefou I updated PR with the newly released bsp4j version.
Surprisingly, this is only for Scala projects and not for e.g. Java projects.
Do you mean that method names of method and classes contain ScalaTestClasses?
Anyhow, I'm happy to merge, although this feature is probably not very relevant for Mill users, as we only support one test framework per module.
It may be not very relevant for Mill users but this will be very handy for Metals and maybe other IDEs as well. Thanks to that Metals will be able to detect single tests for some frameworks.
| override def debugSessionStart(debugParams: DebugSessionParams) | ||
| : CompletableFuture[DebugSessionAddress] = | ||
| completable(s"debugSessionStart ${debugParams}") { state => | ||
| throw new NotImplementedError("debugSessionStart endpoint is not implemented") | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's a DebugProvider capability that is not set by the Mill so it's safe to throw an error here from the BSP server perspective.
I mean, the framework name is only relevant for Scala projects, as it is only referenced in |
|
Thanks for the pointer. I think, this would be the right move, too. |
… test framework name In order to find single tests Metals needs to know test framework for give test suite. sbt/sbt#6830 which adds this feature to the sbt will be available from version 1.7.0 In mill it should be available from 0.10.4 com-lihaoyi/mill#1755
… test framework name In order to find single tests Metals needs to know test framework for give test suite. sbt/sbt#6830 which adds this feature to the sbt will be available from version 1.7.0 In mill it should be available from 0.10.4 com-lihaoyi/mill#1755
I've added
[skip ci]because for now I only want to see what do you folks think about this PR.This PR will stay as a draft until changes in
bsp4jare merged, for now I've used locally publishedbsp4jversion.It is an implementation of the BSP proposal which is described here. This proposal adds an optional framework field to the returned class.
There's already implementation for bloop.