Continual expansion of features, driven by monetization. Complexity, basically.
-
-
Replying to @tahini
Really? Does Visual Studio of today have a lot more features than Visual Studio did in 2005?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Jonathan_Blow @tahini
Like enough features to compensate for Moore's Law? Like 100x as many features?
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @Jonathan_Blow
No, not 100x as many features. Not enough to compensate for Moore’s Law.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tahini @Jonathan_Blow
I get that programmers today are spoiled by processing power and that has made them inferior programmers when it comes to perf — I’m just trying to get at how fact that is particularly highlighted with LSP
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tahini @Jonathan_Blow
I think Jon was just hoping most programmers would know the rough cost delta between a direct call using a shared memory binary AST, and a socket-mediated RPC that requires serializing the data to and from UTF-8 both ways. LSP is just sad proof that they definitely don't.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori @Jonathan_Blow
Was LSP implemented in manner that is performant? No, it doesn’t look like it. But it exists, and I think it’s popularity has to do with the lack of viable alternatives. If implicit suggestion here is to just use an IDE or ctags ... well many people don’t want this things.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tahini @Jonathan_Blow
But this has nothing to do with IDEs. You can trivially design a similar AST interchange protocol that is in-memory, binary, and does not require sockets. The sadness (presumably) comes from the fact that nobody seemed to think that was an important consideration.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori @Jonathan_Blow
Ok this is what I was looking for. So there was a recognized need as an industry to come together to make some sort of AST standard like this, and the chosen implementation (out of presumably others) was bad.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Does socket-based approach come with any advantages at all over the alternatives?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
There are no advantages. If you wanted network-transparency, you would just make one of your implementations be a network bridge. That way, you only pay for serialization in the (exceedingly rare) cases where you need that.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
I don’t have any evidence but I am guessing Microsoft (VS Code) devs pushed for this paradigm because VS Code is a browser. I think Code was one of the first projects I saw using the LSP.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
End of conversation
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.