bQUARKz
6e594c15d7
All checks were successful
JaCoCo Coverage #### Project Overview
No changes detected, that affect the code coverage.
* Line Coverage: 61.37% (17351/28272)
* Branch Coverage: 52.31% (6722/12850)
* Lines of Code: 28272
* Cyclomatic Complexity: 11325
#### Quality Gates Summary
Output truncated.
Test / Build skipped: 15, passed: 601
Intrepid/Prometeu/Studio/pipeline/head This commit looks good
63 lines
2.0 KiB
Markdown
63 lines
2.0 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
id: AGD-0055
|
|
ticket: pbs-lsp-document-links
|
|
title: PBS LSP Document Links
|
|
status: open
|
|
created: 2026-07-15
|
|
resolved:
|
|
decision:
|
|
tags: [studio, lsp, vscode, compiler-pbs, editor, document-links, imports]
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Pain
|
|
|
|
Domain owner: `studio/lsp`
|
|
|
|
PBS import/module references and asset-like surfaces are plain text in VS Code, so users cannot click through to imported modules or related project resources.
|
|
|
|
## Context
|
|
|
|
The compiler understands module references and project files. The LSP does not announce documentLinkProvider, and the VS Code extension delegates all language behavior to the server.
|
|
|
|
## Open Questions
|
|
|
|
- [ ] Which references should become document links first: imports, barrels, stdlib modules, assets/addressables, or docs?
|
|
- [ ] How should virtual or stdlib resources be represented as link targets?
|
|
- [ ] Should document links overlap with go-to-definition or remain a separate lightweight navigation feature?
|
|
|
|
## Options
|
|
|
|
### Option A - Import/module links only
|
|
|
|
- **Approach:** Expose `documentLink` for module references such as `@sdk:gfx` and barrel paths.
|
|
- **Pro:** Narrow, useful, and mostly aligned with existing module resolution.
|
|
- **Con:** Does not cover assets/addressables or documentation links.
|
|
- **Maintainability:** Strong first wave.
|
|
|
|
### Option B - General resource links
|
|
|
|
- **Approach:** Link imports, stdlib modules, assets, addressables, and possibly documentation/resource surfaces.
|
|
- **Pro:** Richer navigation across project resources.
|
|
- **Con:** Requires resource-specific target policy and may overlap with definition.
|
|
- **Maintainability:** Good only after resource ownership is defined.
|
|
|
|
## Tradeoffs
|
|
|
|
Document links should remain lightweight. If a link requires semantic identity and symbol resolution, it may belong in go-to-definition instead.
|
|
|
|
## Recommendation
|
|
|
|
Prefer Option A first: imports and module references only.
|
|
|
|
## Discussion
|
|
|
|
Coordinate stdlib target handling with go-to-definition.
|
|
|
|
## Resolution
|
|
|
|
Ainda em aberto.
|
|
|
|
## Next Step
|
|
|
|
Decide first-wave link targets and how stdlib/module URIs are represented.
|