Builds on top of existing work from #2249, but here's a showcase:
https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/assets/53836821/4b346965-6654-496c-b379-75425d9b493f
TODO:
- [x] handle line wrapping
- [x] implement handling in multibuffer (crashes currently)
- [x] add configuration option
- [x] new theme properties? What colors to use?
- [x] Possibly support indents with different colors or background
colors
- [x] investigate edge cases (e.g. indent guides and folds continue on
empty lines even if the next indent is different)
- [x] add more tests (also test `find_active_indent_index`)
- [x] docs (will do in a follow up PR)
- [x] benchmark performance impact
Release Notes:
- Added indent guides
([#5373](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/issues/5373))
---------
Co-authored-by: Nate Butler <1714999+iamnbutler@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Remco <djsmits12@gmail.com>
### Todo
* [x] tuck the new system prompt away somehow
* for now, we're treating it as built-in, and not editable. once we have
a way to fold away default prompts, let's make it a default prompt.
* [x] when applying edits, re-parse the edit from the latest content of
the assistant buffer (to allow for manual editing of edits)
* [x] automatically adjust the indentation of edits suggested by the
assistant
* [x] fix edit row highlights persisting even when assistant messages
with edits are deleted
* ~adjust the fuzzy search to allow for small errors in the old text,
using some string similarity routine~
We decided to defer the fuzzy searching thing to a separate PR, since
it's a little bit involved, and the current functionality works well
enough to be worth landing. A couple of notes on the fuzzy searching:
* sometimes the assistant accidentally omits line breaks from the text
that it wants to replace
* when the old text has hallucinations, the new text often contains the
same hallucinations. so we'll probably need to use a more fine-grained
editing strategy where we perform a character-wise diff of the old and
new text as reported by the assistant, and then adjust that diff so that
it can be applied to the actual buffer text
Release Notes:
- Added the ability to request edits to project files using the
assistant panel.
---------
Co-authored-by: Antonio Scandurra <me@as-cii.com>
Co-authored-by: Marshall <marshall@zed.dev>
Co-authored-by: Antonio <antonio@zed.dev>
Co-authored-by: Nathan <nathan@zed.dev>
This reverts commit caed275fbf.
NOTE: this should not be merged until #9668 is on stable and the
`ZedVersion#can_collaborate` is updated to exclude all clients without
that change.
Release Notes:
- N/A
---------
Co-authored-by: Piotr Osiewicz <24362066+osiewicz@users.noreply.github.com>
Currently in Zed, certain characters require pressing the key twice to
move the caret through that character. For example: "❤️" and "y̆".
The reason for this is as follows:
Currently, Zed uses `chars` to distinguish different characters, and
calling `chars` on `y̆` will yield two `char` values: `y` and `\u{306}`,
and calling `chars` on `❤️` will yield two `char` values: `❤` and
`\u{fe0f}`.
Therefore, consider the following scenario (where ^ represents the
caret):
- what we see: ❤️ ^
- the actual buffer: ❤ \u{fe0f} ^
After pressing the left arrow key once:
- what we see: ❤️ ^
- the actual buffer: ❤ ^ \u{fe0f}
After pressing the left arrow key again:
- what we see: ^ ❤️
- the actual buffer: ^ ❤ \u{fe0f}
Thus, two left arrow key presses are needed to move the caret, and this
PR fixes this bug (or this is actually a feature?).
I have tried to keep the scope of code modifications as minimal as
possible. In this PR, Zed handles such characters as follows:
- what we see: ❤️ ^
- the actual buffer: ❤ \u{fe0f} ^
After pressing the left arrow key once:
- what we see: ^ ❤️
- the actual buffer: ^ ❤ \u{fe0f}
Or after pressing the delete key:
- what we see: ^
- the actual buffer: ^
Please note that currently, different platforms and software handle
these special characters differently, and even the same software may
handle these characters differently in different situations. For
example, in my testing on Chrome on macOS, GitHub treats `y̆` as a
single character, just like in this PR; however, in Rust Playground,
`y̆` is treated as two characters, and pressing the delete key does not
delete the entire `y̆` character, but instead deletes `\u{306}` to yield
the character `y`. And they both treat `❤️` as a single character,
pressing the delete key will delete the entire `❤️` character.
This PR is based on the principle of making changes with the smallest
impact on the code, and I think that deleting the entire character with
the delete key is more intuitive.
Release Notes:
- Fix caret movement issue for some special characters
---------
Co-authored-by: Conrad Irwin <conrad.irwin@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Thorsten <thorsten@zed.dev>
Co-authored-by: Bennet <bennetbo@gmx.de>
This should help with some of the memory problems reported in
https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/issues/8436, especially the ones
related to large files (see:
https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/issues/8436#issuecomment2037442695),
by **reducing the memory required to represent a buffer in Zed by
~50%.**
### How?
Zed's memory consumption is dominated by the in-memory representation of
buffer contents.
On the lowest level, the buffer is represented as a
[Rope](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rope_(data_structure)) and that's
where the most memory is used. The layers above — buffer, syntax map,
fold map, display map, ... — basically use "no memory" compared to the
Rope.
Zed's `Rope` data structure is itself implemented as [a `SumTree` of
`Chunks`](8205c52d2b/crates/rope/src/rope.rs (L35-L38)).
An important constant at play here is `CHUNK_BASE`:
`CHUNK_BASE` is the maximum length of a single text `Chunk` in the
`SumTree` underlying the `Rope`. In other words: It determines into how
many pieces a given buffer is split up.
By changing `CHUNK_BASE` we can adjust the level of granularity
withwhich we index a given piece of text. Theoretical maximum is the
length of the text, theoretical minimum is 1. Sweet spot is somewhere
inbetween, where memory use and performance of write & read access are
optimal.
We started with `16` as the `CHUNK_BASE`, but that wasn't the result of
extensive benchmarks, more the first reasonable number that came to
mind.
### What
This changes `CHUNK_BASE` from `16` to `64`. That reduces the memory
usage, trading it in for slight reduction in performance in certain
benchmarks.
### Benchmarks
I added a benchmark suite for `Rope` to determine whether we'd regress
in performance as `CHUNK_BASE` goes up. I went from `16` to `32` and
then to `64`. While `32` increased performance and reduced memory usage,
`64` had one slight drop in performance, increases in other benchmarks
and substantial memory savings.
| `CHUNK_BASE` from `16` to `32` | `CHUNK_BASE` from `16` to `64` |
|-------------------|--------------------|
|
|
|
### Real World Results
We tested this by loading a 138 MB `*.tex` file (parsed as plain text)
into Zed and measuring in `Instruments.app` the allocation.
#### standard allocator
Before, with `CHUNK_BASE: 16`, the memory usage was ~827MB after loading
the buffer.
| `CHUNK_BASE: 16` |
|---------------------|
|
|
After, with `CHUNK_BASE: 64`, the memory usage was ~396MB after loading
the buffer.
| `CHUNK_BASE: 64` |
|---------------------|
|
|
#### `mimalloc`
`MiMalloc` by default and that seems to be pretty aggressive when it
comes to growing memory. Whereas the std allocator would go up to
~800mb, MiMalloc would jump straight to 1024MB.
I also can't get `MiMalloc` to work properly with `Instruments.app` (it
always shows 15MB of memory usage) so I had to use these `Activity
Monitor` screenshots:
| `CHUNK_BASE: 16` |
|---------------------|
|
|
| `CHUNK_BASE: 64` |
|---------------------|
|
|
### Release Notes
Release Notes:
- Reduced memory usage for files by up to 50%.
---------
Co-authored-by: Antonio <antonio@zed.dev>
This commit also specializes 'fn push' for large text quantities. That specialized version uses a Vec instead of SmallVec.
This commit shaves off about ~100ms out of 800ms when loading a 600Mb text buffer.
This PR moves the Clippy configuration up to the workspace level.
We're using the [`lints`
table](https://doc.rust-lang.org/cargo/reference/workspaces.html#the-lints-table)
to configure the Clippy ruleset in the workspace's `Cargo.toml`.
Each crate in the workspace now has the following in their own
`Cargo.toml` to inherit the lints from the workspace:
```toml
[lints]
workspace = true
```
This allows for configuring rust-analyzer to show Clippy lints in the
editor by using the following configuration in your Zed `settings.json`:
```json
{
"lsp": {
"rust-analyzer": {
"initialization_options": {
"check": {
"command": "clippy"
}
}
}
}
```
Release Notes:
- N/A
Hopefully this makes it a bit easier for new contributors to dive into
the codebase :)
Release Notes:
- Improved documentation for many core editor types
---------
Co-authored-by: Nathan Sobo <nathan@zed.dev>
This does two things:
1. It optimizes the constructions of `SumTree`s to not insert nodes
one-by-one, but instead inserts them level-by-level. That makes it more
efficient to construct large `SumTree`s.
2. It adds a `from_par_iter` constructor that parallelizes the
construction of `SumTree`s.
In combination, **loading a 500MB plain text file went from from
~18seconds down to ~2seconds**.
Disclaimer: I didn't write any of this code, lol! It's all @as-cii and
@nathansobo.
Release Notes:
- Improved performance when opening very large files.
---------
Co-authored-by: Antonio Scandurra <me@as-cii.com>
Co-authored-by: Julia <julia@zed.dev>
This PR sorts the dependency lists in our `Cargo.toml` files so that
they are in alphabetical order.
This should make them easier to visually scan when looking for a
dependency.
Apologies in advance for any merge conflicts 🙈
Release Notes:
- N/A
- [x] Fill in GPL license text.
- [x] live_kit_client depends on live_kit_server as non-dev dependency,
even though it seems to only be used for tests. Is that an issue?
Release Notes:
- N/A
