Pros of vscode

• More user-friendly interface, especially for beginners
• Extensive marketplace with a wide range of extensions
• Regular updates and active development from Microsoft

Cons of vscode

• Heavier resource usage compared to Emacs with lsp-ui
• Less customizable than Emacs, which may limit advanced users

Code comparison

lsp-ui (Emacs):

(use-package lsp-ui
  :ensure t
  :commands lsp-ui-mode
  :config
  (setq lsp-ui-sideline-enable t))

vscode (settings.json):

{
  "editor.suggestSelection": "first",
  "vsintellicode.modify.editor.suggestSelection": "automaticallyOverrodeDefaultValue"
}

Both projects aim to enhance the development experience with Language Server Protocol (LSP) integration. lsp-ui focuses on providing UI enhancements for Emacs users working with lsp-mode, while vscode is a full-featured IDE that includes built-in LSP support.

vscode offers a more polished, out-of-the-box experience with its graphical interface and extensive marketplace. However, lsp-ui provides Emacs users with powerful LSP integration, allowing for a highly customizable development environment within their preferred text editor.

The choice between the two largely depends on personal preference, workflow, and the level of customization desired in the development environment.

Pros of neovim

• More extensive and active development community
• Built-in terminal emulator for seamless integration
• Lua scripting support for enhanced customization

Cons of neovim

• Steeper learning curve for new users
• Less integrated with external tools compared to Emacs ecosystem

Code comparison

lsp-ui (Emacs):

(use-package lsp-ui
  :ensure t
  :commands lsp-ui-mode
  :config
  (setq lsp-ui-doc-enable t))

neovim:

vim.cmd [[packadd nvim-lspconfig]]
require'lspconfig'.pyright.setup{}
vim.o.completeopt = "menuone,noselect"

Summary

neovim is a powerful, extensible text editor with a strong focus on performance and modern features. It offers a more active development community and built-in terminal emulation. However, it may have a steeper learning curve compared to Emacs with lsp-ui.

lsp-ui, on the other hand, is a package for Emacs that enhances the Language Server Protocol (LSP) integration. It provides a more user-friendly interface for LSP features within the Emacs ecosystem, which may be easier for some users to adopt.

Both projects aim to improve the editing experience for developers, with neovim offering a more comprehensive solution and lsp-ui focusing on enhancing LSP functionality within Emacs.

Pros of lsp-mode

• Core LSP functionality for Emacs, providing a solid foundation for language server integration
• Supports a wide range of programming languages and language servers
• Highly customizable with extensive configuration options

Cons of lsp-mode

• Can be complex to set up and configure for beginners
• May require additional packages for enhanced UI features

Pros of lsp-ui

• Enhances the visual experience of lsp-mode with UI improvements
• Provides additional features like inline documentation, code actions, and signature help
• Easier to set up for users who want a more polished LSP experience out of the box

Cons of lsp-ui

• Depends on lsp-mode, so it's not a standalone solution
• May introduce performance overhead for some users, especially on slower machines

Code Comparison

lsp-mode (basic setup):

(require 'lsp-mode)
(add-hook 'python-mode-hook #'lsp)

lsp-ui (enhancing lsp-mode):

(require 'lsp-mode)
(require 'lsp-ui)
(add-hook 'python-mode-hook #'lsp)
(add-hook 'lsp-mode-hook #'lsp-ui-mode)

In summary, lsp-mode provides the core LSP functionality for Emacs, while lsp-ui enhances the user interface and adds extra features on top of lsp-mode. Users often use both packages together for a comprehensive LSP experience in Emacs.

Pros of eglot

• Lightweight and minimalistic approach, focusing on core LSP functionality
• Seamless integration with built-in Emacs features like xref and completion-at-point
• Faster startup time and lower memory footprint

Cons of eglot

• Fewer customization options and UI enhancements compared to lsp-ui
• Limited support for some advanced LSP features and extensions
• Smaller ecosystem of extensions and plugins

Code Comparison

eglot:

(use-package eglot
  :ensure t
  :hook ((python-mode . eglot-ensure)
         (rust-mode . eglot-ensure)))

lsp-ui:

(use-package lsp-ui
  :ensure t
  :commands lsp-ui-mode
  :config
  (setq lsp-ui-sideline-enable t
        lsp-ui-doc-enable t))

The code examples demonstrate the simplicity of eglot's configuration compared to lsp-ui's more extensive setup options. eglot requires minimal configuration, while lsp-ui offers more customization possibilities for UI elements like sideline and documentation display.

Pros of LanguageClient-neovim

• Designed specifically for Neovim, offering better integration and performance
• Supports a wider range of programming languages out-of-the-box
• More active development and frequent updates

Cons of LanguageClient-neovim

• Less extensive UI customization options
• Requires more manual configuration for advanced features
• May have a steeper learning curve for new users

Code Comparison

LanguageClient-neovim configuration:

let g:LanguageClient_serverCommands = {
    \ 'rust': ['rustup', 'run', 'stable', 'rls'],
    \ 'javascript': ['javascript-typescript-stdio'],
    \ 'python': ['pyls'],
    \ }

lsp-ui configuration:

(use-package lsp-ui
  :ensure t
  :config
  (setq lsp-ui-doc-enable t
        lsp-ui-sideline-enable t
        lsp-ui-flycheck-enable t))

Both repositories aim to provide Language Server Protocol (LSP) support for their respective editors. LanguageClient-neovim focuses on Neovim integration, while lsp-ui enhances the LSP experience in Emacs. LanguageClient-neovim offers broader language support and tighter integration with Neovim, but lsp-ui provides more extensive UI customization options and a potentially gentler learning curve for Emacs users. The choice between the two largely depends on the user's preferred editor and specific requirements for LSP functionality.

Pros of vim-lsp

• Lightweight and fast, with minimal dependencies
• Supports a wide range of language servers out of the box
• Easy integration with other Vim plugins and workflows

Cons of vim-lsp

• Less feature-rich UI compared to lsp-ui
• Documentation and community support may be less extensive
• Configuration can be more complex for advanced setups

Code Comparison

vim-lsp configuration example:

let g:lsp_signs_enabled = 1
let g:lsp_diagnostics_echo_cursor = 1
let g:lsp_highlight_references_enabled = 1
if executable('pyls')
    au User lsp_setup call lsp#register_server({
        \ 'name': 'pyls',
        \ 'cmd': {server_info->['pyls']},
        \ 'whitelist': ['python'],
        \ })
endif

lsp-ui configuration example:

(use-package lsp-ui
  :ensure t
  :config
  (setq lsp-ui-doc-enable t
        lsp-ui-doc-use-childframe t
        lsp-ui-doc-position 'top
        lsp-ui-doc-include-signature t
        lsp-ui-sideline-enable nil
        lsp-ui-flycheck-enable t
        lsp-ui-flycheck-list-position 'right
        lsp-ui-flycheck-live-reporting t
        lsp-ui-peek-enable t
        lsp-ui-peek-list-width 60
        lsp-ui-peek-peek-height 25))