Intrepid/prometeu-studio
Intrepid/prometeu-studio
4
0
Fork 0
Code Pull Requests Activity
prometeu-studio/discussion/workflow/agendas/AGD-0047-pbs-lsp-code-actions-and-quick-fixes.md
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.
Details
Test / Build skipped: 15, passed: 601
Details
Intrepid/Prometeu/Studio/pipeline/head This commit looks good
Details
add LSP agendas
2026-07-15 07:40:45 +01:00

2.0 KiB
Raw Blame History

id ticket title status created resolved decision tags
AGD-0047 pbs-lsp-code-actions PBS LSP Code Actions and Quick Fixes open 2026-07-15
studio
lsp
vscode
compiler-pbs
editor
code-actions
quick-fix

Pain

Domain owner: studio/lsp

PBS diagnostics are visible, but users do not get actionable quick fixes for common compiler/editor problems, making simple repairs slower than necessary.

Context

The LSP maps diagnostics but does not announce codeActionProvider. Compiler diagnostics already carry codes and ranges, but not every diagnostic has enough structured repair data to generate safe edits.

Open Questions

  • Which diagnostics should receive quick fixes first?
  • Should code actions be produced from diagnostic codes only, or from structured compiler repair hints?
  • How should imports, reserved attributes, missing methods, and invalid Doc shapes be prioritized?

Options

Option A - Diagnostic-code quick fixes

  • Approach: Map known diagnostic codes to simple edits in the LSP layer.
  • Pro: Fast for a small set of obvious repairs.
  • Con: Couples fixes to diagnostic text/ranges and can become brittle.
  • Maintainability: Moderate if limited to trivial edits.

Option B - Compiler repair hints

  • Approach: Extend diagnostics with structured repair metadata and let the LSP map hints to code actions.
  • Pro: Keeps product logic close to compiler knowledge.
  • Con: Requires a new diagnostic/repair contract.
  • Maintainability: Strong for non-trivial fixes and future frontends.

Tradeoffs

Quick fixes are only useful if safe. Simple code-based fixes can ship first, but imports and generated stubs need stronger compiler context.

Recommendation

Prefer Option B as the target design, with Option A allowed only for a small bootstrap set of unambiguous repairs.

Discussion

This should follow diagnostics UX and import assistance for the first high-value fixes.

Resolution

Ainda em aberto.

Next Step

Pick the first three diagnostic codes eligible for safe quick fixes.