This PR adds a fast path to the inlay hint request that makes it re-use
already computed inlay hints from previous requests instead of
re-computing them. This is necessary because for some reason VS Code
emits an inlay hint request for every line you scroll, so we need to be
able to respond to these requests against the same document state
quickly. Otherwise, every single scrolled line would result in a request
that can take a few dozen ms to be responded to in long files, putting
unnecessary pressure on the CPU.
It also filters the result set by the inlay hints that have been
requested.
This PR adds language server support for request cancellation to the
following expensive requests: Code actions, auto-completion, document
symbols, folding ranges and semantic highlighting. This means that when
the client informs the language server that a request is stale (e.g.
because it belongs to a previous state of the document), the language
server will now prematurely cancel the computation of the response in
order to reduce the CPU load for requests that will be discarded by the
client anyways.
This PR fixes a bug where both the inlay hint change invalidation logic
and the inlay hint edit delay logic were broken in untitled files.
Thanks to @Julian for spotting this!
This PR implements a number of refinements for the auto-implicit inlay
hints implemented in #6768.
Specifically:
- In #6768, there was a bug where the inlay hint edit delay could
accumulate on successive edits, which meant that it could sometimes take
much longer for inlay hints to show up. This PR implements the basic
infrastructure for request cancellation and implements request
cancellation for semantic tokens and inlay hints to resolve the issue.
With this edit delay bug fixed, it made more sense to increase the edit
delay slightly from 2000ms to 3000ms.
- In #6768, we applied the edit delay to every single inlay hint request
in order to reduce the amount of inlay hint flickering. This meant that
the edit delay also had a significant effect on how far inlay hints
would lag behind the file progress bar. This PR adjusts the edit delay
logic so that it only affects requests sent directly after a
corresponding `didChange` notification. Once the edit delay is used up,
all further semantic token requests are responded to without delay, so
that the only latency that affects how far the inlay hints lag behind
the progress bar is how often we emit refresh requests and how long VS
Code takes to respond to them.
- For inlay hints, refresh requests are now emitted 500ms after a
response to an inlay hint request, not 2000ms, which means that after
the edit delay, inlay hints should only lag behind the progress bar by
about up to 500ms. This is justifiable for inlay hints because the
response should be much smaller than e.g. is the case for semantic
tokens.
- In #6768, 'Restart File' did not prompt a refresh, but it does now.
- VS Code does not immediately remove old inlay hints from the document
when they are applied. In #6768, this meant that inlay hints would
linger around for a bit once applied. To mitigate this issue, this PR
adjusts the inlay hint edit delay logic to identify edits sent from the
client as being inlay hint applications, and sets the edit delay to 0ms
for the inlay hint requests following it. This means that inlay hints
are now applied immediately.
- In #6768, hovering over single-letter auto-implicit inlay hints was a
bit finicky because VS Code uses the regular cursor icon on inlay hints,
not the thin text cursor icon, which means that it is easy to put the
cursor in the wrong spot. We now add the separation character (` ` or
`{`) preceding an auto-implicit to the hover range as well, which makes
hovering over inlay hints much smoother.
This PR adds preliminary support for inlay hints, as well as support for
inlay hints that denote the auto-implicits of a function. Hovering over
an auto-implicit displays its type and double-clicking the auto-implicit
inserts it into the text document.
This PR is an extension of #3910.
### Known issues
- In VS Code, when inserting an inlay hint, the inlay hint may linger
for a couple of seconds before it disappears. This is a defect of the VS
Code implementation of inlay hints and cannot adequately be resolved by
us.
- When making a change to the document, it may take a couple of seconds
until the inlay hints respond to the change. This is deliberate and
intended to reduce the amount of inlay hint flickering while typing. VS
Code has a mechanism of its own for this, but in my experience it is
still far too sensitive without additional latency.
- Inserting an auto-implicit inlay hint that depends on an auto-implicit
meta-variable causes a "failed to infer binder type" error. We can't
display these meta-variables in the inlay hint because they don't have a
user-displayable name, so it is not clear how to resolve this problem.
- Inlay hints are currently always resolved eagerly, i.e. we do not
support the `textDocument/inlayHint/resolve` request yet. Implementing
support for this request is future work.
### Other changes
- Axioms did not support auto-implicits due to an oversight in the
implementation. This PR ensures they do.
- In order to reduce the amount of inlay hint flickering when making a
change to the document, the language server serves old inlay hints for
parts of the file that have not been processed yet. This requires LSP
request handler state (that sometimes must be invalidated on
`textDocument/didChange`), so this PR introduces the notion of a
stateful LSP request handler.
- The partial response mechanism that we use for semantic tokens, where
we simulate incremental LSP responses by periodically emitting refresh
requests to the client, is generalized to accommodate both inlay hints
and semantic tokens. Additionally, it is made more robust to ensure that
we never emit refresh requests while a corresponding request is in
flight, which causes VS Code to discard the respond of the request, as
well as to ensure that we keep prompting VS Code to send another request
if it spuriously decides not to respond to one of our refresh requests.
- The synthetic identifier of an `example` had the full declaration as
its (non-canonical synthetic) range. Since we need a reasonable position
for the identifier to insert an inlay hint for the auto-implicits of an
`example`, we change the (canonical synthetic) range of the synthetic
identifier to that of the `example` keyword.
- The semantic highlighting request handling is moved to a separate
file.
### Breaking changes
- The semantic highlighting request handler is not a pure request
handler anymore, but a stateful one. Notably, this means that clients
that extend the semantic highlighting of the Lean language server with
the `chainLspRequestHandler` function must now use the
`chainStatefulLspRequestHandler` function instead.
