Glitch editor just hides files described in .gitignore, but it would be wonderful if extension would make the folder/file gray color or just hide. UPD: found this error:
No correct pointing in file on ‘Glitch: Show in Web Editor’
When you execute this command, wherever you were in your file, for instance, on line 9, char. 15 (9:15), in opened web editor you are always on the first line, first character. Why won’t make it open a link with this style:
Quick open files using Ctrl+Click does not work due to the wrong path
Hi. Glad you like the extension for the most part, and thank you for the detailed feedback.
1 - Not treating the project as Git repo is deliberate.
That warning should be repressed though, we’ll look into. The default version control system included is a version of the web editor’s Rewind feature. You can still interact with the project through Git via the console using the “Glitch: Console” command.
2 - The in-editor preview thing is tricky.
The example you posted includes an example of the built-in Markdown previewer, which renders the markdown content as HTML and inserts it into a VS Code webview panel.This makes sense for Markdown because it is just static HTML that needs to be rendered. Full Glitch apps are more complex than that and might make calls back to the server in JavaScript or involve things above the level of the document content (like controlling Content Security Policies, setting CORS headers, using WebWorkers, etc.).
The webview panel has constraints on these sort of things that actual browsers do not and may have other behavior differences as well. It’s not really intended for rendering external content (by default it can’t). So, we don’t want to include a feature that we know will behave unexpectedly for some users in a way that we can’t notify about in advance or even detect to alert on reliably.
I know there are other extensions along these lines that tolerate this, but we haven’t been able to convince ourselves that’s a good idea. We do want to provide a good live view solution eventually though, one way or another.
3 - Good suggestion.
4 - The node_modules paths are made a bit challenging because of how they are stored on the server, where those logs are coming form. We do want to fix it though.
Local requires should behave better. Can you send me a remix of the app in question (or create a reduced version exhibiting the same failure)?
5 - Another good suggestion. There are actually a lot of community-related features that aren’t supported. Our main goal with the first release was to deliver on editing capability. Hopefully more complete platform-wide integration will come in the future.
