Feature request add line numbers to buffer selection

[aweis89]

I noticed when prompting, using buffer as the selection, copilot often mixes up the correct line numbers when it references it in the prompt or response.
It seems like when adding line numbers to the selection it's no longer an issue.
Given that referencing lines may be a common use-case, perhaps we should change the default?

[deathbeam]

Hmm, the issue with prepending the line numbers is that it might confuse copilot more often than it will help?Im actually not sure. Because we are sending it as code block its no longer valid code (and it will also not be displayed well at all in show user selection menu)

[jellydn]

Just FYI @gptlang Any thoughts on this?

[aweis89]

Valid concerns, especially given that the selection is customizable so it's not a deal breaker by any means.

For some additional context, I first noticed this issue when asking questions about line X. But where it really started becoming an issue when I integrated this plugin as a linter by asking Copilot to prepend the line number to issues so I can add it to my diagnostics (pretty cool use-case imo we may want to add?). The diagnostic lines were rarely on the correct line until I started prepending the line to the selection:

        prompts = {
          Review = {
            prompt = [[
/COPILOT_REVIEW Your task is to review the provided code snippet, focusing specifically on its readability and maintainability.
  Identify any issues related to:
    - Naming conventions that is unclear, misleading or doesn't follow conventions in ]]
              .. vim.bo.filetype
              .. [[.
    - The presence of unnecessary comments, or the lack of necessary ones.
    - Overly complex expressions that could benefit from simplification.
    - High nesting levels that make the code difficult to follow.
    - The use of excessively long names for variables or functions.
    - Any inconsistencies in naming, formatting, or overall coding style.
    - Repetitive code patterns that could be more efficiently handled through abstraction or optimization.

    Your feedback must be concise, directly addressing each identified issue with:
    - The specific line number(s) where the issue is found.
    - A clear description of the problem.
    - A concrete suggestion for how to improve or correct the issue.
    
    Format your feedback as follows:
    "line=<line_number>: <issue_description>
    
    If you find multiple issues on the same line, list each issue separately within the same feedback statement, using a semicolon to separate them.
    Example feedback:
    
    line=3: The variable name 'x' is unclear. Comment next to variable declaration is unnecessary.
    line=8: Expression is overly complex. Break down the expression into simpler components.
    line=10: Using camel case here is unconventional for lua. Use snake case instead.
    
    If the code snippet has no readability issues, simply confirm that the code is clear and well-written as is.
  instructions: |
    - Review the code for readability issues.
    - Provide concise and actionable feedback.
    - Use the specified format for all feedback.]],
            selection = buffer_with_lines, -- necessary for the lines to be accurate
            callback = function(response)
              local namespace_id = vim.api.nvim_create_namespace("copilot")
              local tabpage = vim.api.nvim_get_current_tabpage()
              local windows = vim.api.nvim_tabpage_list_wins(tabpage)
              local leftmost_win = windows[1]
              local left_pane = vim.api.nvim_win_get_buf(leftmost_win)
              local existing_diagnostics = vim.diagnostic.get(left_pane, { namespace = namespace_id })
              for line in response:gmatch("[^\r\n]+") do
                local lnum, message = line:match("line=(%d+): (.*)")
                local new_diagnostic = {
                  lnum = tonumber(lnum) - 1,
                  col = 0,
                  severity = vim.diagnostic.severity.WARN,
                  message = message,
                }
                table.insert(existing_diagnostics, new_diagnostic)
              end
              vim.diagnostic.set(namespace_id, left_pane, existing_diagnostics)
            end,
          },
        },

[deathbeam]

I think another possible solution would be to simply tell copilot the line range as part of the Active selection we are sending. I think that is quite doable,I will take a look and see if it helps.But yea that use case is pretty neat

[aweis89]

I think another possible solution would be to simply tell copilot the line range as part of the Active selection we are sending. I think that is quite doable,I will take a look and see if it helps.But yea that use case is pretty neat

Although notably, the issue happens when the selection is set to the entire buffer (with no line numbers) rather than just with a sub-selection of the file, which lead me to think copilot is just not that good at counting lines

[deathbeam]

Yea that is why I think maybe providing line range would help. Atm we basically do

Active Selection: filename

contents

so can easily add also line range there I guess

[aweis89]

Yea that is why I think maybe providing line range would help. Atm we basically do

Active Selection: filename

contents

so can easily add also line range there I guess

I can give that a shot and report back

[deathbeam]

Actually already did locally. Looks like copilot understands somewhat. And thats with partial selection

[deathbeam]

Could you try with this? #217

There can probs be some improvements but it needs to be appended only like this at the very end to not break showing diffs and user selection. Technically this can also prepend the line numbers as user's do not see this at all so if that will be necessary can be done when building the Active selection I guess

[aweis89]

Could you try with this? #217

There can probs be some improvements but it needs to be appended only like this at the very end to not break showing diffs and user selection. Technically this can also prepend the line numbers as user's do not see this at all so if that will be necessary can be done when building the Active selection I guess

Unfortunately it seems to still get all the lines wrong in my example prompt (when not adding the lines prefix to each line)

[deathbeam]

Could you try with this? #217
There can probs be some improvements but it needs to be appended only like this at the very end to not break showing diffs and user selection. Technically this can also prepend the line numbers as user's do not see this at all so if that will be necessary can be done when building the Active selection I guess

Unfortunately it seems to still get all the lines wrong in my example prompt (when not adding the lines prefix to each line)

Hmm, I willtry adjusting the line numbers then in selection