Add 2 rust analyzer LSP extensions

[petr-tik]

Implement OpenCargoToml - takes a universal arg to open in another window similar to lsp-clangd-find-other-file.
Still has some outstanding comments for code review.

Add the Related Tests interactive function - for some reason this rust-analyzer endpoint doesn't return Runnable[] but instead a list of key value mappings, where key is always "runnable" and value is the Runnable, hence I couldn't find many opportunities for code reuse with other lsp-rust-analyzer-*-runnable methods

Extract the common code to run a given runnable in cargo-process-mode and use it in lsp-rust-analyzer-run as well as lsp-rust-analyzer-related-tests. Tested manually in a local checkout of rust-analyzer (of course), didn't add any tests, as there isn't a sample rust project.

Misc code tidy-up to pacify flycheck

[petr-tik]

@brotzeit should I add any documentation on these 2 functions or is documentation auto-generated from the code?

[brotzeit]

@brotzeit should I add any documentation on these 2 functions or is documentation auto-generated from the code?

@petr-tik seems to me that only documentation of defcustoms is generated for the wiki.

[ericdallo]

Yes, only documentation of defcustom are auto generated, otherwise you should edit docs/manual-language-docs/lsp-rust.md @petr-tik

[petr-tik]

Yes, only documentation of defcustom are auto generated, otherwise you should edit docs/manual-language-docs/lsp-rust.md @petr-tik

Thanks for clarifying. Since there were no comments about function names or UX, I think I can record the gifs, while changing the implementation

[petr-tik]

Not sure if this belongs here, maybe doom?

I realised that one of those lsp extensions can replace a function defined in rustic-mode.

(if (and (fboundp #'rustic-open-dependency-file)
         (fboundp #'lsp-rust-analyzer-open-cargo-toml))
    (advice-add 'rustic-open-dependency-file :override #'lsp-rust-analyzer-open-cargo-toml))

thoughts?

[yyoncho]

@petr-tik rustic has lsp module, right?

[petr-tik]

@petr-tik rustic has lsp module, right?

Indeed - thanks for pointing out this basic omission of mine. I can contribute my humble patch there, should you decide that this PR is worthy of merging and they deem my little piece of advise a deserving addition.

In the meantime, i shall await your review and verdict on this attempt at extending the already glorious lsp-mode.

[yyoncho]

Looks good: few minor nits.

[yyoncho]

I can contribute my humble patch there,

It should be in lsp-mode since there is rust-mode as well.

[petr-tik]

I can contribute my humble patch there,

It should be in lsp-mode since there is rust-mode as well.

I can leave it at the bottom of the file then? I am just not sure if people want a behind-the-scenes change in interactive functions

[yyoncho]

I can leave it at the bottom of the file then? I am just not sure if people want a behind-the-scenes change in interactive functions

It should not be part of lsp-mode. It should be part of rustic and it should run either OOTB or it should be behind a config option.

[yyoncho]

Can you fix the conflicts?

[petr-tik]

Can you fix the conflicts?

Have addressed your careful review to the best of my limited ability and resolved the conflict in the changelog.

Only the ivy-specific comment left - I think the rest of the PR is ready.