I don't mind if people use AI to help them write, but when I see this kind of thing, it implies to me that they're barely even skimming it before posting. Surely people don't want this super cliche AI-hype-man tone in their blog posts, right? And if they haven't taken the time to at least skim through it and iterate on basic style, why should I assume it's worth my time to read it?
Which explains the exceedingly stupid idea. If you want an LSP for Claude, you need an LSP for English. Wait, let my AI generate an article about that!
> That's not an incremental improvement. That's a category change in how Claude Code navigates your code.
I don’t know anything about the human(s) behind this project, assuming there are any, and intend no malice towards them, but when I encounter language like this, it just kills my enthusiasm for a project.
I wonder if that reaction is now, or will become, a majority one, and that AI flavoured language and products will face some audience headwinds if there aren’t indications of some level of human authorship / editing.
For what's it's worth I never enabled anything and it proactively encouraged me to install various lsp plugins and prompted me to accept to install in most languages I've tried.
since its flagged - gotta comment; I am not the author of the post. I was reading it in passing and thought it was interesting enough to submit. Indeeed did not paid enough attention as to how much "ai written" it was.
It's not hidden at all, Claude pushes it even tho it poisons the context after every edit with false positives because it's always out of date. This feature should be hidden given how half baked it is.
In the same way that good AI coding requires testing, project management and architecture, good AI writing requires you to fill the editor role. Be ruthless. Read line by line. By all means tell the agent to fix stuff. If you don't do this, your blog posts sound generic and lazy.
I’m pretty sure it’s AI written. It has the common AI style of, “That’s not just X! It’s Y!”
Personally I find this annoying. I use AI for my writing but painstakingly try to maintain my own voice rather than lazily edit my prose into LinkedIn-speak.
Why are they doing this with a client plugin per server? It's antithetical to the whole point of LSP?
(At least they're reusing existing servers I suppose, but it stops me using whatever arbitrary one I want, as I could if there was just a single client with arbitrary configuration.)
Just install universal-ctags from your package manager and it’s just a command line interface to build them / regen. Then you can build custom things on top of that. It outputs a big index to a cache dir. Not an AI for the record.
But now your asking the compiler to also be a daemon. The compiler devs to add and maintain a not insignificant feature. The compiler to keep everything it caches for queries (whoops, look at that RAM usage climb!), and to cache data suitable for answering LSP queries (gosh! It's climbing a lot!)
Why does it need to be a daemon? Why isn't the on-disk cache enough? Running a compiler without making changes is instant. Many operations of LSPs feel slower than compiler's incremental compilation.
What cache is needed that the compiler doesn't already have?
It's sad to see that the sane opinion is so heavily downvoted.
LSP as a protocol is fine, but the actual technical implementation of JSON RPC is braindead. Only web devs that don't know anything about native code could devise such an abomination. What happened to plugins and dll's?
Literally everything is written by AI now, even top HN articles.
Which explains the exceedingly stupid idea. If you want an LSP for Claude, you need an LSP for English. Wait, let my AI generate an article about that!
Also the post is definitely AI written partially, but still useful I suppose.
> That's not an incremental improvement. That's a category change in how Claude Code navigates your code.
I don’t know anything about the human(s) behind this project, assuming there are any, and intend no malice towards them, but when I encounter language like this, it just kills my enthusiasm for a project.
I wonder if that reaction is now, or will become, a majority one, and that AI flavoured language and products will face some audience headwinds if there aren’t indications of some level of human authorship / editing.
Here's the commands to install the correct marketplace and LSP plugins:
/plugin marketplace add anthropics/claude-plugins-official
/plugin install typescript-lsp@claude-plugin-directory
See all LSP's names here: https://code.claude.com/docs/en/discover-plugins#code-intell...
Personally I find this annoying. I use AI for my writing but painstakingly try to maintain my own voice rather than lazily edit my prose into LinkedIn-speak.
Why are they doing this with a client plugin per server? It's antithetical to the whole point of LSP?
(At least they're reusing existing servers I suppose, but it stops me using whatever arbitrary one I want, as I could if there was just a single client with arbitrary configuration.)
Check on GitHub.
They should not need more RAM than what the compiler uses.
Most LSPs don't work well for big projects or with non-standard setups like Bazel.
Edit: is this really so controversial it has to be downvoted?
What cache is needed that the compiler doesn't already have?
Also, an LSP needs to update incrementally when you edit the file, not just when you compile.
LSP as a protocol is fine, but the actual technical implementation of JSON RPC is braindead. Only web devs that don't know anything about native code could devise such an abomination. What happened to plugins and dll's?