Mickael,
You wrote that
>IMO, there are much more users not using Eclipse IDE because of
average TypeScript support or non-existing C# support than because
of those missing completions on lambdas.
Do you really think that .net developers will start downloading Eclipse as crazy just after you add C# editor? I know many .net developers and they will laugh hearing such statement. If you can't run VS on Red Hat Linux there is MonoDevelop for this and you can run VS Code on Linux. This may be my personal problem but I do not get why would people choose Eclipse for C# development. Really don't get it. Are you going to port all of the additional functionality they (VS) have beyond code editor as well? Debugger, mobile development tools (to replace Android development tools) and so on.
By reusing existing code server for TypeScript you by definition will get the same features as VS Code already has. This is the best case scenario you can get from this. So why should anyone bother to use Eclipse if they already have same features in VS Code and VS? Why not to use VS Code or WebStorm instead starting from right now? In any case you will be offering the same features in best case.
I agree with one statement:
--
>We cannot say the current state is good for everything
and will remain forever.
--
Yes, this is what I was telling that there are issues even for JDT. And they will never be solved by adding new editors for new not yet existing (or just different) languages.
The bottom line is that your answer is very clear. And it is:
--
Some of Eclipse contributors have goals that go beyond the current
Eclipse user base. The current user base isn't necessarily what
drives all of us.
--
plus
--
so far, it seems like those issues are not top-priority of any
contributor according to their vision of the IDE.
--
clear and honest.
Serhiy