And it is amusing that async through a buffer has always been possible. Just far more common for folks to not go that route on round one.
And it is amusing that async through a buffer has always been possible. Just far more common for folks to not go that route on round one.
Every time I get back to trying out emacs again, I find myself wondering why I would bother with the massive time sink to get it customized to be a sub-par equivalent to another tool that works better for me.
Doom emacs comes the closest for pre-configured setups, but even that isn't halfway to the productivity of what I am trying to replace.
What I really wish is sublime had gone with something other than python for plugins, and was more scriptable overall...
I admit that perhaps there is a configurable lag built in (it would make sense to do so) and while there are other examples that I know bother me, this is the one that jumped out straight away. I'd have to dig back in to have more specifics.
M-x is basically instant for me, though. So, not sure why anything like that would be slow.
Good luck getting it fixed, if you are still trying. A basic profiler-start, type, profiler-stop, profiler-report can probably pay the blame easily.
Can you give me a hint on how to do the async LSP thing then? I never was actually interested in becoming a master in Emacs. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
That said, most of the newest lsp code is built with the idea that calls out to the server are fast enough to just block.
I sometimes fear it hurts my productivity, but I'm not seeing any real boost in the folks that use them.