This PR implements a UI for the side-by-side diff, using blocks to align
the two sides and adding a coherent `SplitEditorElement`.
Release Notes:
- N/A
---------
Co-authored-by: cameron <cameron.studdstreet@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Anthony Eid <hello@anthonyeid.me>
Co-authored-by: Zed Zippy <234243425+zed-zippy[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Happy New Years! This PR is a second take at
https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/pull/38127 (cc @ConradIrwin)
This PR is significantly less complicated than the last attempt: while
we still keep our data on the `NavigationHistory` object, we no longer
tightly integrate it with the existing back/forward "browser history."
Instead, we keep our own stack of `(origin, target)` pairs (in a struct
to make it easy to extend with e.g., tag names in the future).
The PR is split into two separable commits. Most of the implementation
is in the second commit, which:
- Defines the stack data structure
- Implements `pane::GoToOlderTag` and `pane::GoToNewerTag` in terms of
the stack
- Hooks into `navigate_to_hover_links` to push tag stack entries
This last bit is the most fiddly. The core challenge is that we need to
keep track of the `origin` location and calculate the `target` location
across three codepaths that might involve creating a new editor and/or
splitting the pane. One thing in particular I found difficult was that
an editor's `nav_history` (an `ItemNavHistory`) seems to be populated
asynchronously. Instead of relying on it, I decided in this code to make
my own `ItemNavHistory`. I briefly tried to refactor the code in
question, but it seemed like it would significantly increase the scope
of the change.
I prefer this all-in-one tracking centered around
`navigate_to_hover_links ` to the `start/finish` approach taken in
https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/commit/b69a2ea200561de9de0edf4d0c4428ee887fb918
because I find it easier to convince myself that the right data is being
populated at the right times. Of course, let me know if you think
there's a better solution.
Closes#14206
Release Notes:
- ??? I don't know what to write here! Suggestions welcome
Follow-up to #46001
That initial fix partly addressed the issue for diffs managed by the
`GitStore`, but not for other diffs (e.g. those managed by the
`ActionLog` or `CommitView`). The underlying issue is that we switched
to using a `Buffer` to represent the diff base text, and when updating
the diff we were calling `set_text` on this buffer and not waiting for
reparsing to finish. When the base text was represented by a series of
independent `BufferSnapshot`s, this wasn't an issue because we would
parse the base text in the background as part of computing the diff
update. This PR fixes the issue by waiting on reparsing to finish after
each call to `set_text`.
Release Notes:
- N/A
This PR reworks the (still feature-gated) side-by-side diff view to use
a different approach to representing the multibuffers on the left- and
right-hand sides.
Previously, these two multibuffers used identical sets of buffers and
excerpts, and were made to behave differently by adding a new knob to
the multibuffer controlling how diffs are displayed. Specifically, the
left-hand side multibuffer would filter out the added range of each hunk
from the excerpts using a new `FilteredInsertedHunk` diff transform, and
the right-hand side would simply not show the deleted sides of expanded
hunks. This approach has some problems:
- Line numbers, and actions that navigate by line number, behaved
incorrectly for the left-hand side.
- Syntax highlighting and other features that use the buffer syntax tree
also behaved incorrectly for the left-hand side.
In this PR, we've switched to using independent buffers to build the
left-hand side. These buffers are constructed using the base texts for
the corresponding diffs, and their lifecycle is managed by `BufferDiff`.
The red "deleted" regions on the left-hand side are represented by
`BufferContent` diff transforms, not `DeletedHunk` transforms. This
means each excerpt on the left represents a contiguous slice of a single
buffer, which fixes the above issues by construction.
The tradeoff with this new approach is that we now have to manually
synchronize excerpt ranges from the right side to the left, which we do
using `BufferDiffSnapshot::row_to_base_text_row`.
Release Notes:
- N/A
---------
Co-authored-by: cameron <cameron.studdstreet@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: HactarCE <6060305+HactarCE@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Miguel Raz Guzmán Macedo <miguel@zed.dev>
Co-authored-by: Anthony <anthony@zed.dev>
Co-authored-by: Cameron <cameron@zed.dev>
Fixes a bug that led to us unnecessarily restarting a language server
when we were looking at a single file of a given language.
Release Notes:
- Fixed a bug that led to Zed sometimes starting an excessive amount of
language servers
Editor is a choke point in our compilation graph while also being a very
common crate that is being edited. So reducing things that depend on it
will generally improve compilation times for us.
Release Notes:
- N/A *or* Added/Fixed/Improved ...
Before this change the active theme and icon theme were retrofitted onto
the ThemeSettings.
Now they're in their own new global (GlobalTheme::theme(cx) and
GlobalTheme::icon_theme(cx))
This lets us remove cx from the settings traits, and tidy up a few other
things along the way.
Release Notes:
- N/A
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d472fbdd-7736-4bd7-8a90-8cca356b2815
This PR adds `editor: diff clipboard with selection` - good for spotting
the differences in eerily-similar code, which is when refactoring code,
as you need to see what needs to be passed in in order to maintain
previous behavior of both snippets.
1. Copy some text from anywhere
2. Highlight some text in Zed
3. Run `editor: diff clipboard with selection`
Like JetBrains' IDEs and VS Code with the `PartialDiff` package, if the
selection is empty, we take the entire buffer as the selection.
Caveats:
- We do not know the language of the text in the clipboard. I went ahead
and just assumed that in most cases, it will be the same language as the
selected text, which does mean we will highlight the old text
incorrectly if they are copying from a different language, but I think
in most cases, it will be the same, and the alternative of always having
no syntax highlighting is worse. PyCharm seems to do the same thing.
Release Notes:
- Added an `editor: diff clipboard with selection` action
---------
Co-authored-by: Junkui Zhang <364772080@qq.com>
Co-authored-by: Ben Kunkle <ben@zed.dev>
