Allow showOutput exception for check.

[mixedCase]

I'm currently using the "check" actionOnSave, and every time I save the bottom window switches to the output tab, rather than the problems one I was on.

While I could set rust.showOutput to false, that means that running the other Cargo commands will no longer switch to the output tab.

Is there any chance to have an exception for this usecase? Thanks.

[KalitaAlexey]

@mixedCase,
I don't see any reason to add any exceptional cases.
If you didn't need the output channel most of the time, I would suggest you to set "rust.showOutput" to false and to show the output channel via View->Output when you needed it.

[mixedCase]

@KalitaAlexey That runs contrary to most programming tools out there. When checking code for errors, the user is usually interested in the errors' details rather than the status code of the checker. When the user is running or compiling an app, they're usually interested in the output (unless errors prevent the program from compiling).

In other words, this issue is more of a UX bug than a feature request :)

[KalitaAlexey]

@mixedCase,
The extension will show the Problems panel when VSCode provides API for that.
Until than I am inclined to keep it as is.
Let's hear other people's opinions.
If they want it, I will add it.
What do you think about it?

[mixedCase]

As fair as can get. Thank you.

As for the implementation detail, I think simply not switching to the output tab on running the check command would be enough until such an API for the problems tab becomes available. I took a cursory glance to the cargo component source and I'm not sure what even causes the switch to the output tab to be honest, so I don't know if what I just proposed viable.

[KalitaAlexey]

@mixedCase,
It is really easy to add.
The line which shows the output channel.
It is enough to modify the condition.
I just don't want to add anything, which other may not like.

[mixedCase]

I've left messages on the official forum, mozilla's #rust, freenode's ##rust and #rust:matrix.org asking for people to leave feedback here on wether they would be in favor or opposed to the feature. In each occasion, only once did someone using VSCode for Rust development chime in, and he wasn't using check on save.

If nobody answers in X amount of time (leaving X to you), can we assume there's no opposition to the change and worst case, it could be reverted if people request it?

[KalitaAlexey]

@mixedCase,
I will implement it tomorrow.
Okay?

[mixedCase]

Haha, well thanks! Sorry for the insistence.

[myrrlyn]

If it helps, I'm in favor of this as well. To me, the Output pane is for things I'm running directly, whereas the Problems pane is for VSCode deciding to spontaneously talk to me about issues.

Fantastic plugin, Kalita, thanks for all your effort in maintaining it. You make VSCode a hell of a Rust editor.

[KalitaAlexey]

@myrrlyn,
I am actually Alexey)

[KalitaAlexey]

I am going to make the extension not show the output channel if the command which to be executed is either build or check.
The old behavior remains for clippy, run, test because they show the output which the extension cannot show in the Problems panel.

[myrrlyn]

50/50 shot and I guessed wrong :( I was going to guess that but I've seen enough last names that looked like first names I wasn't sure if I wanted to go against my assumptions on ordering. Thanks *Mr.* Kalita :p On Feb 28, 2017 9:44 PM, Alexey <notifications@github.com> wrote: @myrrlyn<https://github.com/myrrlyn>, I am actually Alexey) — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#129 (comment)>, or mute the thread<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFpZVelpNGWDMzYtr54lyvJXr1L8VTUnks5rhPeggaJpZM4MNsAq>.

[KalitaAlexey]

Little change.
I want to make the extension not show the output channel only for the check command and only if the command is executed because actionOnSave is set to "check".
My motivation is that the user invoked any command via the command palette expects some feedback.
actionOnSave = check may be used for RLS-like behavior.

@mixedCase @myrrlyn,
What do you think about it?
I suspend my work on it until I get your opinion.
I may miss something.

[myrrlyn]

The output from check is unnecessary if it's clean, so I'm not opposed to silencing it when invoked automatically. I presume that when the RLS shows up more permanently it'll report issues to the Problems pane? I think that'd be fine.

I'm happy with check-on-save being silenced so far, I think.