shellcheck integration

shellcheck provides some nice warnings and it would be great to have it as linting tool integrated in bash-language-server

[esn89]

I noticed something similar, by default, does the language server offer diagnostics/linting and proper practices?

For example putting quotes around variables whenever you use them. Or is this strictly autocomplete?

For me, I don't see any diagnostics

[skovhus]

shellcheck provides some nice warnings and it would be great to have it as linting tool integrated in bash-language-server

Good idea. Are you up for creating a PR? Maybe just a proof of concept.

Good idea. Are you up for creating a PR? Maybe just a proof of concept.

Unfortunately I don't speak typescript.

[dseynhae]

I work on my bash scripts in VS Code, where I have both the shellcheck and Bash IDE extensions.
That makes the errors (bash-language-server) and diagnostics (shellcheck) pop up at the same time, in consistent annotations...
I guess the "integration" request is already in place, and accommodated by most smart editors??
The snapshot below shows the "outline" (from bash-language-server) and "problems" (from both shellcheck and bash-language-server) appearing as I type my scripts...

[elfklx]

Is there any movement on this issue? What is the difference in functionalities between shellcheck and bash-ls diagnostics?

[skovhus]

As there is already editor plugins for spellcheck, I'm not sure what kind of integration would be required here. See https://github.com/koalaman/shellcheck#in-your-editor

@beltaurus one thing that might help with the noise is to turn off the bash ide "Highlight parsing errors" setting.

@manpacket

Would a section in the README documenting how to use it with spellcheck be enough?

[pacak]

There are editor plugins for spellcheck, a bunch of them. And there is a language service protocol that allows to replace all those plugins with combination of language agnostic LSP client in the editor and editor agnostic LSP server.

Anyway, I went back to shellcheck since it provides better functionality.

(manpacket)

[skovhus]

Thanks for getting back.

Anyway, I went back to shellcheck since it provides better functionality.

But you could use both right? The goal of bash-language-server is currently not linting (as spellcheck), but support for documentation, symbol highlighting, jump to definition, and auto completion. So these should compliment spellcheck LSPs/extensions.

[Anomalocaridid]

The goal of bash-language-server is currently not linting

Why not? Other lsp servers for other languages, like rls for Rust and ccls and cquery for C (to name a few) support linting/code diagnostics. And it's not like bash-language-server doesn't already (sort of) lint, it's just that instead of specific messages like the ones shellcheck gives, it usually just says "Failed to parse expression," which is not very helpful.

[skovhus]

@DERPSQUID9

Why not?

We haven’t focused on features that other extensions or LSPs already do well, as they can be combined/installed at the same time.

There are a bunch of editor integrations for shellcheck (but maybe no LSP?). https://github.com/koalaman/shellcheck/blob/master/README.md#in-your-editor

But I’m very open for feedback here. I see a value in everything integrated into one tool, but it is also about time, scoping, and if people are open to contributing to this project.

It seems like this is a rather requested feature, so I could do an assessment how easy the integration would be.

it usually just says "Failed to parse expression," which is not very helpful.

Note that you can disable this error in the configuration. Maybe we should make that the default?

Anyways, let me hear your perspective why we should invest in implementing and maintaining spellcheck integration when other projects already handle this? Convenience? Are they not working together?

Thanks for taking your time to make bash language server better. :)

[skovhus]

@pacak

And there is a language service protocol that allows to replace all those plugins with combination of language agnostic LSP client in the editor and editor agnostic LSP server.

Not sure what you mean here? Which LSP allows you to combine these?