[PATCH] D140462: [clangd] Add schema for `.clangd` config

[Edwin Kofler via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

hyperupcall marked 2 inline comments as done.
hyperupcall added a comment.

In D140462#4018983 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D140462#4018983>, @sammccall wrote:

> The difficulty in testing is that:
>
> - JSON-schema is totally unknown in llvm-project, so there are no tools but also no expectation that contributors understand it
> - llvm-project doesn't like dependencies, particularly those that aren't in C++ or python
> - having done some digging, interop seems really poor...
>
> I tried 3 consumers (`ajv-cli`, `yaml-language-server`, and `yajsv`) and **hit different blocking bugs in all of them** when using obvious, spec-compliant approaches to writing schemas. I only have experience with `ajv`, so I suppose it means



> It has the "python problem", where it's readable and you can see at a glance why the code is correct - even if it isn't.
> (Having spent a couple of days with json-schema now, I **don't** think it's straightforward. That file seems simple so far, but there are simple C++ programs too! And it carefully dodges the interop issues, which is *subtle*).

I appreciate that you took the time to experiment with those three implementations of JSON-schema - perhaps I was naive in thinking that the different implementations were more mature. On my side, this makes me want to validate the various schemas in SchemaStore with more implementations than just `ajv` to improve the experience for everyone.

> ---
>
> Fixing this is an unreasonable burden to place on a new contributor, I've taken a shot at this and have something almost working: https://reviews.llvm.org/D140745.
>
> It's pretty draft-ish:
>
> - That patch just checks in the generated files {`Fragment.inc`, `YAML.inc`, `doc.md`, `schema.json`}, (maybe) that belongs in the build system
> - the schema is correct but `yaml-language-server` chokes on it due to https://github.com/redhat-developer/yaml-language-server/issues/823, so need to restructure
> - files would need to be moved around etc
> - tests need to be added/updated
> - i'm not sure whether having a json-schema for `schema.yaml` is actually a good idea, it was mostly a learning exercise

This looks pretty neat! I think something like that revision would be a better way forward. I will go ahead and upload a new Diff, I suppose just for completeness, but I don't expect anything to change much since it doesn't address your points about syncing with documentation or the obscurity of the specification.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D140462/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D140462