An LSP server for lilypond would be awesome! I'm using it all the time for coding in neovim, and it's a total game changer.
Best, Kenneth Valentin Petzel, May 06, 2024 at 15:23: > I’m wondering if the Frescobaldi approach is actually working out. Keep in > mind that originally Frescobaldi was just a project for adding support for > Lilypond to KATE, then it became a KDE parts solution, then it started to do > everything itself for more control. And this means you’ll need to maintain > and > develop many components for a niche community. Frescobaldi is essentially a > full text editor, solely for Lilypond. And I do not think the Lilypond > community is the best place for maintaining a whole text editor. > > This also means you get a weird dependency situation which is hard to > maintain. Frescobaldi has a lot of qt-independent functionality, including a > reduced Lilypond parser and transformation tools and stuff. And it has a lot > of > interface stuff. This is the part that depends on qt5, and only one component > depends on the poppler integration. > > So maybe instead of trying to maintain this collosus of tools it could make > sense to split it up into different parts: > > → An LSP server > → A transformative toolset > → An editor using these features > > This way no matter what might happen to Frescobaldi, much of the > functionality > would be still usable. With an LSP server any modern text editor with an LSP > client could benefit from understanding Lilypond syntax. And being able to a > toolset would make extending editors much more fun. > > And this way the maintainance effort could be split. Maybe the LSP could even > become part of Lilypond itself (no need to implement a new parser if you > already have one), keeping it always up to date (rather than the always > outdated approch we have with Frescobaldi). > > Cheers, > Valentin > > Am Sonntag, 5. Mai 2024, 22:37:35 MESZ schrieb Jean Abou Samra: > > > The technical stuff is way over my head, but this reads like the top- > > > level description of a GSOC project (in case the mentioned friend > > > doesn't take the bait)... > > > > GSoC projects are nice for doing focused work on some specific part > > of the code base. For overhauling just about everything, I'd be a lot > > more skeptical, especially since there will unavoidably be fallout > > to deal with afterwards in terms of bugs, and that's less nice to do > > if the person who did the port isn't available after the summer to > > do that part of the work.
