Previously, we would use `Project::serialize_buffer_for_peer` and
`Project::deserialize_buffer` respectively in the host and in the
guest to create a new buffer or just send its ID if the host thought
the buffer had already been sent.
These methods would be called as part of other methods, such as
`Project::open_buffer_by_id` or `Project::open_buffer_for_symbol`.
However, if any of the tasks driving the futures that eventually
called `Project::deserialize_buffer` were dropped after the host
responded with the buffer state but (crucially) before the guest
deserialized it and registered it, there could be a situation where
the host thought the guest had the buffer (thus sending them just the
buffer id) and the guest would wait indefinitely.
Given how crucial this interaction is, this commit switches to creating
remote buffers for peers out of band. The host will push buffers to guests,
who will always refer to buffers via IDs and wait for the host to send them,
as opposed to including the buffer's payload as part of some other operation.
As part of #1405, we changed the way we performed undo and redo to
support combining transactions that were not temporally adjacent for
IME purposes.
We introduced a bug with that release that caused divergence
when performing undo: the bug was caused by only changing the visibility
of fragments whose insertion id was contained in the undo operation. However,
an undo operation also affects deletions which we were mistakenly not
considering. Randomized tests caught this but I guess we didn't run enough
of them.
Now, instead of using these versioned offset ranges, we locate the
fragments associated with a transaction using the transaction's
edit ids. To make this possible, buffers now store a new map called
`insertion_slices`, which lets you look up the ranges of insertions
that were affected by a given edit.
Co-authored-by: Antonio Scandurra <antonio@zed.dev>
* Make `UnregisterProject` a request. This way the client-side project can wait
to clear out its remote id until the request has completed, so that the
contacts panel can avoid showing duplicate private/public projects in the
brief time after unregistering a project, before the next UpdateCollaborators
message is received.
* Remove the `RegisterWorktree` and `UnregisterWorktree` methods and replace
them with a single `UpdateProject` method that idempotently updates the
Project's list of worktrees.
This ensures that entries don't randomly re-appear on remote worktrees
due to observing an update too late. In fact, it ensures that the remote
worktree has the same starting state of the host before preemptively applying
the fs operation locally.
When opening a buffer, some language servers might start reporting
diagnostics. When closing a buffer, they might report that no diagnostics
are present for that buffer. Previously, we would keep an empty summary entry
which would cause us to open a buffer in the project diagnostics view, only to
drop it because it contained no diagnostics. However, the act of opening it
caused the language server to asynchronously report non-empty diagnostics.
We would therefore handle this as an update, but the previous closing of the
buffer would cause the language server to report empty diagnostics again. This
would cause the project diagnostics view to thrash infinitely between these two
states, pegging the CPU and constantly refreshing the UI.
With this commit we won't maintain empty summary entries for files that contain
no diagnostics, which fixes the above issue.
Co-Authored-By: Nathan Sobo <nathan@zed.dev>
We don't need this anymore because worktree updates are foreground
messages.
Co-Authored-By: Nathan Sobo <nathan@zed.dev>
Co-Authored-By: Max Brunsfeld <max@zed.dev>
When handling this messages on the host, wait until the desired
version has been observed before performing the save.
Co-Authored-By: Nathan Sobo <nathan@zed.dev>
This is required because, after joining, we want to be able to refer
to operations that have happened prior to joining, which are not
captured by the state. There is probably a way of reconstructing operations
from the state, but that seems unnecessary and we've already talked about
wanting to have the server store operations rather than state once we start
persisting worktrees.
