Skip to content
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

[BUG] Completion doesn't override parentheses #128

Open
DanielAdari opened this issue Feb 12, 2024 · 8 comments
Open

[BUG] Completion doesn't override parentheses #128

DanielAdari opened this issue Feb 12, 2024 · 8 comments
Labels

Comments

@DanielAdari
Copy link

DanielAdari commented Feb 12, 2024

Extension: 0.1.6
LLM LS: 0.4.0

Usually when you declare a function or other variables, the editor adds a closing bracket.

For example:

def foo(<CURSOR>)

When you type (, the editor adds ) automatically. After accepting the completion, the output looks something like:

def foo(bar: str):)

Maybe we should use the bracket as a stop token, but that would mean the completion would be one line only for these cases.

Note: I'm using a local model

@McPatate
Copy link
Member

Yes this issue is a pain, I think post-processing would be best though it might be complicated given there are so many edge cases.

Not sure if this issue should live in https://github.com/huggingface/llm-ls.

@DanielAdari
Copy link
Author

What do you mean by post processing?

Should the extension get the completion from LLM LS and then, according to the editor's state, accept the completion with the right characters removed?

Or should the extension propagate more metadata back to the LLM LS so he would do the heavy lifting in an editor generic way?

Copy link
Contributor

This issue is stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale label Mar 19, 2024
@DanielAdari
Copy link
Author

Still relevant 👆🏻

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the stale label Mar 20, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

This issue is stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale label Apr 19, 2024
@DanielAdari
Copy link
Author

Super duper relevant! 😀

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the stale label Apr 21, 2024
@McPatate
Copy link
Member

Don't worry about the staleness bot, I'll come back to this when I have more time!

Copy link
Contributor

This issue is stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale label May 24, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants