This repository was archived by the owner on Apr 14, 2022. It is now read-only.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why didn't this check work before? I'd think that if it was sending a
nullset of settings, we'd be able to see that and skip entirely.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
didChangeConfigurationis supposed to send object that contains changed settings. Root issettings. It started coming empty like{ settings { } }There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let me check in my R extension... I tried to comment out what you suggested in core ext but it didn't fix it. This change is more of a quick fix, I don't know actual reason things changed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Empty would certainly mean empty (since we're getting the whole object), but it's definitely strange that it'd be sending empty unless my hack to the core extension to send
nullis being converted somewhere in the chain to{}...Now that I look, that hack only appears in the
nodecode, so commenting it out wouldn't really do anything, yeah...