Creation of LSPReporter by PraneethS42 · Pull Request #1314 · pyta-uoft/pyta

PraneethS42 · 2026-03-04T04:12:56Z

Proposed Changes

Works on #1307. Adds a new reporter called LSPReporter that outputs JSON in the format of the LSP 3.17 specification. Uses the lsprotocol types of Diagnostic, Range and Position to structure output. Also added lsprotocol to dependencies within packages/python-ta/pyproject.toml. Other changes:

Added reporter to list in reporters/__init__.py
Added the new path to the _get_reporter_class_path function in src/python_ta/check/helpers.py
Created tests in test_lsp_reporter.py, passing in input from lsp_reporter_input.py

Screenshots of your changes (if applicable)

Type of Change

(Write an X or a brief description next to the type or types that best describe your changes.)

Type	Applies?
🚨 Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
✨ New feature (non-breaking change that adds functionality)	x
🐛 Bug fix (non-breaking change that fixes an issue)
♻️ Refactoring (internal change to codebase, without changing functionality)
🚦 Test update (change that only adds or modifies tests)
📚 Documentation update (change that only updates documentation)
📦 Dependency update (change that updates a dependency)	x
🔧 Internal (change that only affects developers or continuous integration)

Checklist

(Complete each of the following items for your pull request. Indicate that you have completed an item by changing the [ ] into a [x] in the raw text, or by clicking on the checkbox in the rendered description on GitHub.)

Before opening your pull request:

I have performed a self-review of my changes.
- Check that all changed files included in this pull request are intentional changes.
- Check that all changes are relevant to the purpose of this pull request, as described above.
I have added tests for my changes, if applicable.
- This is required for all bug fixes and new features.
I have updated the project documentation, if applicable.
- This is required for new features.
I have updated the project Changelog (this is required for all changes).
If this is my first contribution, I have added myself to the list of contributors.

After opening your pull request:

I have verified that the pre-commit.ci checks have passed.
I have verified that the CI tests have passed.
I have reviewed the test coverage changes reported by Coveralls.
I have requested a review from a project maintainer.

Questions and Comments

(Include any questions or comments you have regarding your changes.)

PraneethS42 · 2026-03-04T04:30:42Z

I'm creating a draft PR to check if I am on the right path with this. I looked to json_reporter.py for inspiration and used the LSP documentation, but I'm not sure if I have the right logic/format. I will add Changelog and documentation updates once I convert this to a proper PR.

david-yz-liu

Hi @PraneethS42, I definitely think you are on the right track. 👍

I left a few high-level comments about the direction you're taking.

david-yz-liu · 2026-03-04T21:30:41Z

@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
+import json
+
+import attrs


We don't currently require this module in our dependency list and I don't think it's necessary to achieve the functionality here. Try using just lsprotocol's type converters, e.g. here.

david-yz-liu · 2026-03-04T21:37:22Z

+    messages: dict[str, list[NewMessage]]
+
+    def display_messages(self, layout: BaseLayout) -> None:
+        json_output = {}


So overall this is good but I think we can go even further with the types to match the LSP. I think the main class we want to target is PublishDiagnosticsParams, which sits one level about the individual Diagnostics`.

For this class you can use a URI that's just based on the file path (i.e., file://...).

Because the reporter needs to handle multiple files, for now you can output JSON which is a list of PublishDiagnosticsParams objects.

coveralls · 2026-03-07T19:55:00Z

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 22936925775

Details

31 of 33 (93.94%) changed or added relevant lines in 2 files are covered.
No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
Overall coverage increased (+0.03%) to 89.987%

Changes Missing Coverage	Covered Lines	Changed/Added Lines	%
packages/python-ta/src/python_ta/reporters/lsp_reporter.py	29	31	93.55%

Totals
Change from base Build 22746237351:	0.03%
Covered Lines:	3478
Relevant Lines:	3865

💛 - Coveralls

david-yz-liu

@PraneethS42 nice work, in addition to the comments I left, please also add mention of the new reporter in the output-format config option docs in the default .pylintrc file, and in the documentation (under "configuration")

david-yz-liu · 2026-03-09T17:17:53Z

The reporter should be added here as well

david-yz-liu · 2026-03-09T17:18:52Z

+
+from .core import NewMessage, PythonTaReporter
+
+category_to_lsp = {


name this constant with ALL_CAPS style

david-yz-liu · 2026-03-09T17:19:09Z

+
+
+def _lsp_severity(category: str) -> types.DiagnosticSeverity:
+    """Convert the PyLint category to DiagnosticSeverity type, return default of warning"""


"PyLint" -> "Pylint"

david-yz-liu · 2026-03-09T17:19:26Z

+
+
+class LSPReporter(PythonTaReporter):
+


Add a docstring for this class

david-yz-liu · 2026-03-09T17:23:57Z

+
+
+@pytest.fixture()
+def lsp_output(prevent_webbrowser_and_httpserver):


the prevent_webbrowser_and_httpserver isn't necessary here, as the HTMLReporter isn't being used

david-yz-liu · 2026-03-09T17:24:02Z

+    return json.loads(buf.read())
+
+
+def test_output_is_list(lsp_output):


Overall these tests aren't very precise. I would generate an explicit expected object and compare (using ==) the actual JSON that's output by the reporter.

PraneethS42 · 2026-03-11T04:45:11Z

I have added the syntax fixes, documentation changes and changed the test structure to just be a comparison of output in one test.

david-yz-liu

Nice work, @PraneethS42!

PraneethS42 requested a review from david-yz-liu March 4, 2026 04:33

PraneethS42 changed the title ~~Lspreporter~~ Creation of LSPReporter Mar 4, 2026

david-yz-liu reviewed Mar 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

PraneethS42 added 3 commits March 5, 2026 21:27

initial LSPReporter file

59eef33

bug fixes and serialization

8910015

refactored to remove attrs import

443bf6f

PraneethS42 force-pushed the lspreporter branch from 496477e to 443bf6f Compare March 6, 2026 02:28

PraneethS42 added 2 commits March 5, 2026 22:45

Changing to publishdiagnosticsparams

900e8f7

changelog update

685fb46

PraneethS42 marked this pull request as ready for review March 7, 2026 19:45

Added tests and proper configuration

c7e0f4d

PraneethS42 requested a review from david-yz-liu March 8, 2026 17:47

david-yz-liu reviewed Mar 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

docs and test updates

88c05ca

PraneethS42 requested a review from david-yz-liu March 11, 2026 04:46

david-yz-liu approved these changes Mar 11, 2026

View reviewed changes

david-yz-liu merged commit 2174e6a into pyta-uoft:master Mar 11, 2026
30 checks passed


		from .core import NewMessage, PythonTaReporter

		category_to_lsp = {



		def _lsp_severity(category: str) -> types.DiagnosticSeverity:
		"""Convert the PyLint category to DiagnosticSeverity type, return default of warning"""



		@pytest.fixture()
		def lsp_output(prevent_webbrowser_and_httpserver):

		return json.loads(buf.read())


		def test_output_is_list(lsp_output):

Conversation

PraneethS42 commented Mar 4, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Proposed Changes

Type of Change

Checklist

Questions and Comments

Uh oh!

PraneethS42 commented Mar 4, 2026

Uh oh!

david-yz-liu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

coveralls commented Mar 7, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 22936925775

Details

💛 - Coveralls

Uh oh!

david-yz-liu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

PraneethS42 commented Mar 11, 2026

Uh oh!

david-yz-liu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

PraneethS42 commented Mar 4, 2026 •

edited

Loading

coveralls commented Mar 7, 2026 •

edited

Loading