-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 389
Documentation and Source links for local dependencies #1866
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
Hi, thanks for opening the issue, to get docs on hover it is needed to build them with the |
By adding the flag I get the haddock documentation in the popup, but not the links to Documentation and Source. Mac OS 10.15.7 |
https://github.com/eirikm/hls-testcase/tree/reproduce_1866_take_1 Hover on putStrLn is displayed fine with both haddock and Documentation-link Hover on LocalLib.someFunc displays haddock but not Documentation- and Source-link (I guess this is intentionally) Hover on PackagesLib.someFunc displays everything fine! Hover on ExtraDepsLib.someFunc is missing haddock documentation. |
Ah, I see you're using Stack. Is there a Stack equivalent? Or is the functionality enabled by default? |
I thought that this would do the trick: but apparently it doesn't in my case. |
@eirikm what about add
to try make links be shown? also did not
fix the haddock docs for extra deps? |
I don't think we will easily get the "Documentation" link, since that jumps to the Haddock HTML on Hackage. For local dependencies there is no way to get cabal to build the haddock HTML for dependencies that I know of, so we have nowhere to link to. Maybe with some more hacking around with cabal we could get this. For the "Source" link I think the fundamental issue is #708. |
Hi, today I get a Documentation and a Source link when hovering functions in packages published on hackage.
Is it possible to get these links for functions in private libraries?
I have tried
stack haddock
which generates the html documentation and source needed but it doesn't look like the haskell-plugin is aware of this.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: