Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

x/tools/gopls: semantic tokens: highlight control flow tokens #67663

Open
jmg-duarte opened this issue May 27, 2024 · 5 comments · May be fixed by golang/tools#495
Open

x/tools/gopls: semantic tokens: highlight control flow tokens #67663

jmg-duarte opened this issue May 27, 2024 · 5 comments · May be fixed by golang/tools#495
Labels
FeatureRequest gopls Issues related to the Go language server, gopls. help wanted Tools This label describes issues relating to any tools in the x/tools repository.
Milestone

Comments

@jmg-duarte
Copy link

gopls version

Build info

golang.org/x/tools/gopls v0.15.3
golang.org/x/tools/[email protected] h1:zbdOidFrPTc8Bx0YrN5QKgJ0zCjyGi0L27sKQ/bDG5o=
github.com/BurntSushi/[email protected] h1:9F2/+DoOYIOksmaJFPw1tGFy1eDnIJXg+UHjuD8lTak=
github.com/google/[email protected] h1:ofyhxvXcZhMsU5ulbFiLKl/XBFqE1GSq7atu8tAmTRI=
golang.org/x/exp/[email protected] h1:2O2DON6y3XMJiQRAS1UWU+54aec2uopH3x7MAiqGW6Y=
golang.org/x/[email protected] h1:SernR4v+D55NyBH2QiEQrlBAnj1ECL6AGrA5+dPaMY8=
golang.org/x/[email protected] h1:5BMeUDZ7vkXGfEr1x9B4bRcTH4lpkTkpdh0T/J+qjbQ=
golang.org/x/[email protected] h1:vcVnuftN4J4UKLRcgetjzfU9FjjgXUUYUc3JhFplgV4=
golang.org/x/[email protected] h1:ScX5w1eTa3QqT8oi6+ziP7dTV1S2+ALU0bI+0zXKWiQ=
golang.org/x/[email protected] h1:uH9jJYgeLCvblH0S+03kFO0qUDxRkbLRLFiKVVDl7ak=
golang.org/x/[email protected] h1:KUas02EjQK5LTuIx1OylBQdKKZ9jeugs+HiqO5HormU=
honnef.co/go/[email protected] h1:oFEHCKeID7to/3autwsWfnuv69j3NsfcXbvJKuIcep8=
mvdan.cc/[email protected] h1:G3QvahNDmpD+Aek/bNOLrFR2XC6ZAdo62dZu65gmwGo=
mvdan.cc/xurls/[email protected] h1:lyBNOm8Wo71UknhUs4QTFUNNMyxy2JEIaKKo0RWOh+8=
go: go1.22.3

go env

GO111MODULE=''
GOARCH='arm64'
GOBIN=''
GOCACHE='/Users/jmgd/Library/Caches/go-build'
GOENV='/Users/jmgd/Library/Application Support/go/env'
GOEXE=''
GOEXPERIMENT=''
GOFLAGS=''
GOHOSTARCH='arm64'
GOHOSTOS='darwin'
GOINSECURE=''
GOMODCACHE='/Users/jmgd/go/pkg/mod'
GONOPROXY=''
GONOSUMDB=''
GOOS='darwin'
GOPATH='/Users/jmgd/go'
GOPRIVATE=''
GOPROXY='https://proxy.golang.org,direct'
GOROOT='/usr/local/go'
GOSUMDB='sum.golang.org'
GOTMPDIR=''
GOTOOLCHAIN='auto'
GOTOOLDIR='/usr/local/go/pkg/tool/darwin_arm64'
GOVCS=''
GOVERSION='go1.22.3'
GCCGO='gccgo'
AR='ar'
CC='clang'
CXX='clang++'
CGO_ENABLED='1'
GOMOD='/dev/null'
GOWORK=''
CGO_CFLAGS='-O2 -g'
CGO_CPPFLAGS=''
CGO_CXXFLAGS='-O2 -g'
CGO_FFLAGS='-O2 -g'
CGO_LDFLAGS='-O2 -g'
PKG_CONFIG='pkg-config'
GOGCCFLAGS='-fPIC -arch arm64 -pthread -fno-caret-diagnostics -Qunused-arguments -fmessage-length=0 -ffile-prefix-map=/var/folders/4d/v4vg0mc15_gf9skpnjgmmhdm0000gn/T/go-build2911028327=/tmp/go-build -gno-record-gcc-switches -fno-common'

What did you do?

Write code with some sort of control flow:

func controlFlow(i int64) {
    if i < 0 {
        return true
    } else {
        return false
    }
}

What did you see happen?

return, if and else (i.e. control flow keywords) are marked as keyword only, while the TextMate grammar already has support for control flow
Screenshot 2024-05-27 at 08 49 34

What did you expect to see?

The controlFlow modifier along with the respective keywords, like in this Rust example
Screenshot 2024-05-27 at 08 50 38

Editor and settings

  "go.toolsManagement.autoUpdate": true,
  "gopls": {
    "ui.semanticTokens": true
  },

Logs

No response

@jmg-duarte jmg-duarte added gopls Issues related to the Go language server, gopls. Tools This label describes issues relating to any tools in the x/tools repository. labels May 27, 2024
@gopherbot gopherbot added this to the Unreleased milestone May 27, 2024
@hyangah
Copy link
Contributor

hyangah commented May 28, 2024

@jmg-duarte
Copy link
Author

Hmm might be... That's unfortunate, but I think it would still be useful to add it (and I'm open to do so if there's interest).
For a bit more context: my themes highlight control flow as they're a really important part of the code, the idea is based on https://lunacookies.github.io/sema/

Anyway, I also found the issue on my theme, it was that pesky "keyword": "".

If you think the controlFlow addition is not useful, we can close this.

@adonovan adonovan changed the title x/tools/gopls: add control flow token support x/tools/gopls: semantic tokens: highlight control flow tokens May 29, 2024
@adonovan
Copy link
Member

The LSP semantic tokens design is extensible, so servers are not bound to emit all and only the tokens enumerated in the standard; this seems like a well-defined and reasonable class of tokens to highlight; and it's easy enough to add. Would you care to send us a CL? The function you need to change is golang.org/x/tools/gopls/internal/golang.(*tokenVisitor).inspect.

@jmg-duarte
Copy link
Author

The following diff doesn't work and I don't understand why, isn't it the modifier that I want to change?

I'm testing using const semDebug = true and gopls semtok foo.go > /dev/null but pointing to the gopls/internal/protocol/semtok/semtok.go and looking for ReturnStmts as they're the most prolific ones.

@adonovan if you could take a look, that would be amazing! Thanks in advance!

diff --git a/gopls/internal/golang/semtok.go b/gopls/internal/golang/semtok.go
index ec628f501..a23cf92a7 100644
--- a/gopls/internal/golang/semtok.go
+++ b/gopls/internal/golang/semtok.go
@@ -356,9 +356,9 @@ func (tv *tokenVisitor) inspect(n ast.Node) (descend bool) {
 		tv.token(n.OpPos, len(n.Op.String()), semtok.TokOperator, nil)
 	case *ast.BlockStmt:
 	case *ast.BranchStmt:
-		tv.token(n.TokPos, len(n.Tok.String()), semtok.TokKeyword, nil)
+		tv.token(n.TokPos, len(n.Tok.String()), semtok.TokKeyword, []string{"controlFlow"})
 		if n.Label != nil {
-			tv.token(n.Label.Pos(), len(n.Label.Name), semtok.TokLabel, nil)
+			tv.token(n.Label.Pos(), len(n.Label.Name), semtok.TokLabel, []string{"controlFlow"})
 		}
 	case *ast.CallExpr:
 		if n.Ellipsis.IsValid() {
@@ -369,7 +369,7 @@ func (tv *tokenVisitor) inspect(n ast.Node) (descend bool) {
 		if n.List == nil {
 			iam = "default"
 		}
-		tv.token(n.Case, len(iam), semtok.TokKeyword, nil)
+		tv.token(n.Case, len(iam), semtok.TokKeyword, []string{"controlFlow"})
 	case *ast.ChanType:
 		// chan | chan <- | <- chan
 		switch {
@@ -392,7 +392,7 @@ func (tv *tokenVisitor) inspect(n ast.Node) (descend bool) {
 	case *ast.CompositeLit:
 	case *ast.DeclStmt:
 	case *ast.DeferStmt:
-		tv.token(n.Defer, len("defer"), semtok.TokKeyword, nil)
+		tv.token(n.Defer, len("defer"), semtok.TokKeyword, []string{"controlFlow"})
 	case *ast.Ellipsis:
 		tv.token(n.Ellipsis, len("..."), semtok.TokOperator, nil)
 	case *ast.EmptyStmt:
@@ -400,7 +400,7 @@ func (tv *tokenVisitor) inspect(n ast.Node) (descend bool) {
 	case *ast.Field:
 	case *ast.FieldList:
 	case *ast.ForStmt:
-		tv.token(n.For, len("for"), semtok.TokKeyword, nil)
+		tv.token(n.For, len("for"), semtok.TokKeyword, []string{"controlFlow"})
 	case *ast.FuncDecl:
 	case *ast.FuncLit:
 	case *ast.FuncType:
@@ -410,15 +410,15 @@ func (tv *tokenVisitor) inspect(n ast.Node) (descend bool) {
 	case *ast.GenDecl:
 		tv.token(n.TokPos, len(n.Tok.String()), semtok.TokKeyword, nil)
 	case *ast.GoStmt:
-		tv.token(n.Go, len("go"), semtok.TokKeyword, nil)
+		tv.token(n.Go, len("go"), semtok.TokKeyword, []string{"controlFlow"})
 	case *ast.Ident:
 		tv.ident(n)
 	case *ast.IfStmt:
-		tv.token(n.If, len("if"), semtok.TokKeyword, nil)
+		tv.token(n.If, len("if"), semtok.TokKeyword, []string{"controlFlow"})
 		if n.Else != nil {
 			// x.Body.End() or x.Body.End()+1, not that it matters
 			pos := tv.findKeyword("else", n.Body.End(), n.Else.Pos())
-			tv.token(pos, len("else"), semtok.TokKeyword, nil)
+			tv.token(pos, len("else"), semtok.TokKeyword, []string{"controlFlow"})
 		}
 	case *ast.ImportSpec:
 		tv.importSpec(n)
@@ -445,9 +445,9 @@ func (tv *tokenVisitor) inspect(n ast.Node) (descend bool) {
 		pos := tv.findKeyword("range", offset, n.X.Pos())
 		tv.token(pos, len("range"), semtok.TokKeyword, nil)
 	case *ast.ReturnStmt:
-		tv.token(n.Return, len("return"), semtok.TokKeyword, nil)
+		tv.token(n.Return, len("return"), semtok.TokKeyword, []string{"controlFlow"})
 	case *ast.SelectStmt:
-		tv.token(n.Select, len("select"), semtok.TokKeyword, nil)
+		tv.token(n.Select, len("select"), semtok.TokKeyword, []string{"controlFlow"})
 	case *ast.SelectorExpr:
 	case *ast.SendStmt:
 		tv.token(n.Arrow, len("<-"), semtok.TokOperator, nil)
@@ -457,7 +457,7 @@ func (tv *tokenVisitor) inspect(n ast.Node) (descend bool) {
 	case *ast.StructType:
 		tv.token(n.Struct, len("struct"), semtok.TokKeyword, nil)
 	case *ast.SwitchStmt:
-		tv.token(n.Switch, len("switch"), semtok.TokKeyword, nil)
+		tv.token(n.Switch, len("switch"), semtok.TokKeyword, []string{"controlFlow"})
 	case *ast.TypeAssertExpr:
 		if n.Type == nil {
 			pos := tv.findKeyword("type", n.Lparen, n.Rparen)
@@ -465,7 +465,7 @@ func (tv *tokenVisitor) inspect(n ast.Node) (descend bool) {
 		}
 	case *ast.TypeSpec:
 	case *ast.TypeSwitchStmt:
-		tv.token(n.Switch, len("switch"), semtok.TokKeyword, nil)
+		tv.token(n.Switch, len("switch"), semtok.TokKeyword, []string{"controlFlow"})
 	case *ast.UnaryExpr:
 		tv.token(n.OpPos, len(n.Op.String()), semtok.TokOperator, nil)
 	case *ast.ValueSpec:

@adonovan
Copy link
Member

adonovan commented May 29, 2024

The Encode function computes the intersection of the tokens and modifiers that were enumerated with the tokens and modifiers that were requested by the client. You'll need to add the new modified to this list in the protocol package

	semanticModifiers = [...]string{
		"declaration", "definition", "readonly", "static",
		"deprecated", "abstract", "async", "modification", "documentation", "defaultLibrary",
	}

This list determines the set of modifiers used in the fake clients in the tests. You will need to make your real client send the new modifier too (though apparently it already does, at least when configured to talk to the Rust LSP server).

jmg-duarte added a commit to jmg-duarte/tools that referenced this issue May 30, 2024
While it's not defined in the LSP specification (as of version 3.17)
it's supported by other tools such as Rust Analyzer

Fixes golang/go#67663
jmg-duarte added a commit to jmg-duarte/tools that referenced this issue May 30, 2024
While it's not defined in the LSP specification (as of version 3.17)
it's supported by other tools such as Rust Analyzer.

Fixes golang/go#67663
@findleyr findleyr modified the milestones: Unreleased, gopls/backlog May 30, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
FeatureRequest gopls Issues related to the Go language server, gopls. help wanted Tools This label describes issues relating to any tools in the x/tools repository.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants