fix: Remove dead code from LSPImages #1461
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
rubenporras
reviewed
Dec 9, 2025
FlorianKroiss
force-pushed
the
remove-dead-code
branch
from
0d155c3 to
1c71757
Compare
rubenporras
approved these changes
Dec 9, 2025
sebthom
force-pushed
the
remove-dead-code
branch
from
1c71757 to
4ea7676
Compare
rubenporras
force-pushed
the
remove-dead-code
branch
from
4ea7676 to
cbb5de8
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
A bit more cleanup:
IMG_STRINGis associated with the non-existingstring.pngin the ImageRegistry. Furthermore, it is overwritten a few lines later, becauseIMG_STRING == IMG_TEXT.IMG_COLORis associated with the non-existingcolor.png. Furthermore,IMG_COLORis not used anyway, because for Color we create an actual image with just that color.I'm not entirely sure if we can remove this code, because it is technically API, but I'd be surprised if someone used either of these constants or tried to access their value within the image registry.
I would also be fine with keeping these entries, but then I would add an appropriate comment
Any thoughts?