|Re: [cdt-dev] Thoughts on LSP / Clangd integration|
even once LSP4E and Clangd mature a bit and become more featureful?
I meant, at this moment, there's probably too many missing things compared to CDT for someone to choose the generic editor over CDT's so I think it will be more useful for people interested in Clangd itself. But yeah, if both LSP4E and Clangd mature then I can definitely see situations where users would prefer the Generic editor + Clangd. You can already get very accurate diagnostics with the right setup so it's promising.
Back to the top