I have concerns

[ConnerAdamsMaine]

Checked other resources

• This is not a bug report or feature request (Please use issues for those).
• This is a question about rustaceanvim, not rust-analyzer or Neovim.
• This is not a question about autocompletion.
• I have read the README.
• I have read the FAQ.
• I have searched for a solution using :h rustaceanvim.
• I have searched existing discussions.
• I have searched the existing issues/discussions of other plugins related to this question (if applicable).
• I have searched the existing rust-analyzer discussions (if applicable).
• I have added a very descriptive title to this question.

Description

I just have a lot of concerns with what you're trying to do vs what you're actually doing... please either defend reasoning or fix these. If you require assistance fixing or would like to pass some off, please let me know.

Lets start from the top.

• Your health.lua has a broken error path that will throw a far different error than intended. health.lua:133
• Global LSP monkey-patch is repeatedly wrapped and NEVER restored. lsp/init.lua:13
• Restart logic can start clients multiple times & stop early. lsp/init.lua:106
• Background executor can hard-crash on missing junit file. executors/background.lua:60 & executors/background.lua:63
• Shell command construction is unsafe and cross-platform broken. shell.lua:47
• Arbitrary lua execution in user commands ftplugin/rust.lua:88
• DAP config path can nil-index and crash. dap.lua:386
• Public docs advertise wrong config key. config/init.lua:105, doc/rustaceanvim.txt:209, config/internal.lua:164
• Your comment over the file-watcher hack logic contradicts its own comment. lsp/init.lua:55
• Dependecy version probing via shell-concatenated commands. Health.lua:74
• termopen executor has a shared global state race. Too many files to list
• Neovim ftplugin conventions are ignored in Vimscript file. ftplugin/rust.vim:1-end_of_file
• Your helptage reference is broken in docs. doc/mason.txt:11
• Theres stale command naming in docs & comments. Too many files to list
• Your lazy.nvim guidance is opinionated and non-idiomatic. README.md:107
• Naming and style inconsistencies and legacy APIs in use.
• Multiple typos and quality paper cuts
• The Timer handling lifecycle in your restart path is incomplete.

Example Code

-- /home/fuckmychudlife/Desktop/rustaceanvim/ftplugin/rust.lua:85-93
  elseif cmd == RustAnalyzerCmd.config then
    local ra_settings_str = vim.iter(fargs):join(' ')
    local f = load('return ' .. ra_settings_str)
    local ok, ra_settings = pcall(f)
    if not ok or type(ra_settings) ~= 'table' then
      return vim.notify('RustAnalyzer config: invalid Lua table.\n' .. ra_settings_str, vim.log.levels.ERROR)
    end
    lsp.set_config(bufnr, ra_settings)
  end

Neovim version (nvim -v)

0.11.6

Operating system/version

Fedora 43 KDE Plasma

Output of :checkhealth rustaceanvim

Not copy pasting this right now. Not necessary for my problems.

[mrcjkb]

This (and your profile / previous contributions) reek of AI slop.
Please see the No LLM/AI policy:

No LLMs for issues.

No LLMs for pull requests.

No LLMs for comments on issues/PRs, including translation.
English is encouraged, but not required.
You are welcome to post in your native language and rely
on others to have their own translation tools of choice to interpret your words.

Regarding some of your points:

1. False. It falls back to a default error or an empty string in an unreachable case
2. False. It's wrapped once (see :h require)
3. False. It's safe to call vim.lsp.start for a buffer multiple times with the same name, root_dir.
4. True. Could be fixed, but this is nothing critical - it doesn't crash Neovim.
5. Needs reproducing.
6. The "arbitrary Lua" is parsed from the command args.
   (This one really reeks of AI slop.)
7. False (I use a static type checker in CI to catch such issues).
8. No it doesn't. Perhaps your AI agent has "misunderstood" something?
9. ...which works fine.
10. termopen executor was inherited from rust-tools.nvim.
    It does not use global state. Is this another AI hallucination?
11. Makes no sense / missing context / needs elaboration.
12. True. Needs to be updated.
13. Missing context / needs elaboration.
14. False.
15. False.
16. Missing context, needs elaboration.
17. Missing context, needs elaboration.

A long list of "concerns" without elaboration or ways to reproduce is a waste of my time.
Please also refer to the code of conduct regarding constructive feedback.
Locking this discussion due to strong suspicion of AI slop.