definition does not exclude `::` in strings about languageserver HOT 7 CLOSED

Ya, you are right. we would need to check the current scope at

from languageserver.

I'm using the version of languageserver on CRAN. When I hold Ctrl and hover over print in the below code, it works as expected (I get the hover definition, and if I click it opens a file with the definition):

xml_find_all(x, "base::print")

When I do the same for

xml_find_all(x, "descendant::expr")

I get basically the same error:

[Error - 18:02:34] Request textDocument/definition failed.
  Message: {"message":"there is no package called ‘descendant’","call":{}}

  Code: -32603 

I don't have the package descendant installed, so I think that's the problem. (I tried installing it, but it doesn't seem to be on CRAN.) @renkun-ken Do you have it installed?

Moving the mouse over expr without Ctrl held down, I don't get any hover popup but I also don't get an error showing. The code for hover_reply includes a tryCatch that is probably catching an identical error. I think I removed the equivalent tryCatch in the definition code, so I've introduced an inconsistency there. @randy3k If you want, I could do a PR to put it back in (also for the symbol reply functions).

from languageserver.

@andycraig, thanks for your testing. My point is that I'm not sure if it makes sense to provide definition of foo::bar in string literals, since the code I provide here is really an XPath expression rather than R code, or it could be some C++ code, or anything.

from languageserver.

@renkun-ken Ah, beg your pardon. No wonder descendant isn’t on CRAN! Re-reading the issue I now see what you mean.

from languageserver.

Thanks! I test it and it works well now.

from languageserver.

Actually it doesn’t work for multi line strings. But they are not common plus the search would be costly. This is good enough for now.

from languageserver.

Multi-line strings can be handled by parsed xml doc, i.e., xpath query if the cursor is in the range of a string literal, but it requires that the document is syntactically correct to be parseable. It think it's good enough too.

from languageserver.