Better expose role/importance of input.json

[anderseknert]

While the role of input.json is covered in the README, it's pretty far down on the page and easily missed by anyone who just want to get things up and running as quickly as possible. The whole Evaluate feature, including the role of input.json, is also covered in Regal's language server docs... but that's of course even less likely to be discovered in the scenario described. We should think about how to better highlight this in the UI of this extension, making it nearly impossible to miss for those unaware of it.

Note: the Debug code lens / command also depends on input.json, and most/all things mentioned below applies to that just as much!

Some ideas to consider, but I'm sure we can think of more!

• If Evaluate is clicked with no input.json present — display message to inform user of this and that they should create one
• If Evaluate is clicked with no input.json present — create automatically?
  • This would require explaining what we did though, and may feel intrusive
  • An empty JSON file isn't too helpful. We could generate one from a schema or known refs to input.. but not trivial
• If Evaluate is clicked with no input.json present — check if there are any other JSON files in the workspace (or workspace root) that potentially could be used as input?
  • This would also require some explanation, as it should be obvious to the user what's used for evaluation
• Add walkthroughs for getting started #327 which of course would help people discover this feature!
• Make the section on input.json more prominent in the project README?
• Add configuration option to use other name than input.json. This would provide flexibility but wouldn't help much with discoverability.

More ideas?

Perhaps we'll need to make some changes server side in Regal too, and I'll create issues in that project later if needed.

[srenatus]

We could also have a textbox in the sidebar for input. I've never found the input.json completely natural. 💭

[anderseknert]

While I want this to be prominently featured in VS Code, I'd rather avoid making it exclusive to VS Code. I wouldn't mind a textbox in the sidebar (based on input.json or not), but if so as an alternative to a solution we can support more broadly. We'd also need to solve many of the problems listed above (just substitute "input.json" with "input textbox" in the bullet points above 😊) regardless.

[charlieegan3]

Could we just have a code action for each rule that says "Create input.json" unless one exists? In future it might infer the expected input.json fields based on the current module, but for starters it could just be a simple template.

[anderseknert]

That's an interesting idea! I had considered using a code lens for this, which we'd show until we had one, and then switch over to show Evaluate / Debug. But that would be rather intrusive, and it would not be clear why it's needed. A code action is less intrusive, although probably easier to miss for the same reason. But if I remember correctly, they also provide a description field where we can expand on the why. So yes, that's an idea I'd love to try!