ale

: https://github.com/sublimelsp/LSP Vim (I'm working on it): https://github.com/dense-analysis/ale/pull/4671

isps; AFAIK there's still no equivalent of make -j for compiling systems. I'm a happy vim user (though there is some jank with slimv, admittedly, but it's mostly prevalent around multiple thread situations) and setup the command ,ci to call my own clouseau-inspect function; it just inspects a symbol with clouseau instead of slimv's inspector. Also have a janky watch/unwatch pair of functions that just refreshes the inspector every second. (https://github.com/Jach/dots/blob/master/.sbclrc#L113 if curious, some other junk in .swank.lisp and .vimrc too, and there's https://github.com/dense-analysis/ale/issues/4061 to call sblint on your project...) But more graphical tools like this are what I hope to one day see more of and are how the free Lisps can close the gap in this area with the commercial Lisps. I believe there's not much Allegro can do that poking around SBCL can't do, but for many things it's just nicer to have a GUI. Want to explore all the symbols and values in a package? Easy enough to script that, but not as nice as just having a table of symbols, and even nicer if you can set watches on some of them, or even set conditional breakpoints on value changes. None of the tools need to be tightly integrated with a single IDE either, because all the stuff necessary to debug Lisp is in the running Lisp itself. It's just that the GUI situation continues to suck. LSP has gotten more popular with other languages and editors, sometimes I wonder if the acronym was made as an inside joke because it's basically how Lisp + Slime/Swank have worked...

to be a great resource. Series on using vim as you editor (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLm323Lc7iSW_wuxqmKx_x...) Introduction to setting up your vim configuration (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2QJYq4IX6M&t=512s) I recommend giving it a try. The process of learning it all was fun, and as you may have heard you can eventually get pretty quick using Vim.

ith some additions to set error format might be the `make` program. vim-slime does not have an understanding of s expressions but vim itself does, using the parentheses object. See `:help text-objects`. I like that vim-slime does not have this understanding because what if I'm using it with Ruby or something. But vim support of text objects is good enough that it's never a problem. While I'm on the subject, `])` and `[(` searching for parens in vim is awesome. Vim operates using an entirely different set of values than emacs. Selecting and searching for text should not be the purview of a plug-in, it should be built into the editor. Compiling code should be delegated to compilers. Vim does a great job of this kind of separation of concerns, it is the Zen of vim, its core philosophy. Emacs is great and it works fantastically, it just operates using a different philosophy. 2. I work more in Clojure but I'm trying to get more into common lisp. Clojure has suggestions in neovim via language server protocol[2]. The suggestions are very good[3]. This is not as developed for the common lisp story[4] but I'll try it out and see how good it is. I've never had much patience for autocompletion. I don't even like it when the editor puts in pairs of parentheses when I've only typed the first left parentheses. Vim does have autocomplete through the language server protocol, but I don't use it. Regarding suggestions as I type, there's ale[5], but I think I would find suggestions as I type a little too distracting and might slow me down. I find the normal LSP stuff to be good enough. 1: https://vim.fandom.com/wiki/Errorformat_and_makeprg 2: https://blog.inkdrop.app/how-to-set-up-neovim-0-5-modern-plu... 3: https://github.com/clojure-lsp/clojure-lsp 4: https://github.com/cxxxr/cl-lsp 5: https://github.com/dense-analysis/ale 6: https://github.com/venantius/vim-cljfmt

oc: https://github.com/reconquest/shdoc From this stack post [1]: - checkbashisms: http://man.he.net/man1/checkbashisms - shlint: https://github.com/duggan/shlint (archived) Prettier: https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=esbenp.p... Within all these linters and auto-formatters I did not find checks that enforce, for example, the Function Comments of the Shell Style Guide by Google: All function comments should describe the intended API behaviour using: Description of the function. Globals: List of global variables used and modified. Arguments: Arguments taken. Outputs: Output to STDOUT or STDERR. Returns: Returned values other than the default exit status of the last command run. Hence, I thought we could make a Bash linting tool that verifies compliance with the Shell Style Guide by Google. To do so, a brief start was made here [2]. It identifies/lists elements in that style guide that may be verified automatically. Since Bash has been around longer than me, I think there may be some people better suited for the development of this enhanced linter. Hence, I thought it might be wise, for impact and usability, to share this idea here. What do you say, HN? [0]: https://google.github.io/styleguide/shellguide.html [1]: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3668665/is-there-a-stati... [2]: https://github.com/TruCol/checkstyle-for-bash

e 80% use-case to get mindshare". To be clear, I don't think rust-analyzer is that opinionated or flashy or lazy. I think it's awesome. But Rust's linting story is essentially "why would you use anything besides rust-analyzer, language servers are awesome and have no downsides." Which like, yeah they do. [0]: https://github.com/dense-analysis/ale/blob/master/doc/ale.tx...