Replies: 1 comment 1 reply
-
I'm not entirely against this idea, but I don't think there's a strong use case. Mostly because:
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
1 reply
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Instead of creating config keys for different adapters and since you can get an adapter's config from
dap.session()
, you could instruct the user to createdap_view
config key in their adapter config:Then you don't have to update
dap-view
setup opts, only create the logic in the plugin and update readme about whatdap_view
.This also allows the user to have finer grain control over
dap-view
. For example if I have twodelve
configurations, one that is for a web application and the other TUI:I'm sure we could provide callbacks in the adapter configuration as well.
Personally I like this sort of inversion pattern because it requires the least amount of complexity at the plugin level and provides the user with the most flexibility.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions