Post Template Task with Arguments

[theschitz]

Related to #324.

Changes proposed in this pull request:

• Adds the possibility to pass arguments for commands defined in tasks.

Additional comments

Ehm... don't let the commit history fool you. Branched out of the dev branch for #324.

[theschitz]

Hmm, I wonder... have I broken the test suites again 😠

[jwikman]

Don't know why the tests are failing, but I guess you figure out tomorrow morning or so.. 😜

Just had one reflection while looking at this

[jwikman]

I think we have to go for any[] here...

[theschitz]

unknown[] maybe?

[jwikman]

I think we have quite a challenge here... (not only with your test...)

I don't know if we could support arguments of other than simple data types, and (meaningful) commands with only simple data types seems to be a bit rare (at least the built-in commands)...

Maybe we need to let the user provide a datatype (from a list of supported ones), and we cast them before sending them to the executeCommand function...?

[theschitz]

I think we have quite a challenge here... (not only with your test...)

I don't know if we could support arguments of other than simple data types, and (meaningful) commands with only simple data types seems to be a bit rare (at least the built-in commands)...

Maybe we need to let the user provide a datatype (from a list of supported ones), and we cast them before sending them to the executeCommand function...?

This could get interesting... I guess we would need to define the structure of the supported data types in the syntax.json as well? Otherwise we would cast from an object with unknown properties.

[jwikman]

This could get interesting... I guess we would need to define the structure of the supported data types in the syntax.json as well? Otherwise we would cast from an object with unknown properties.

Exactly... The most obvious one to support is Uri (see https://code.visualstudio.com/api/references/commands for built-in commands)
But other than that, I don't know... Do we really want to go down this road?
Maybe we should settle with simple datatypes, plus URI? The simple datatypes is easily supported (pretty much what you support right now), but how would the syntax look like for an URI string?
It should support

• http URL - URI.parse(path)
• file:// syntax - URI.parse(path)
• file path syntax - URI.file(path)

[jwikman]

What do you say @theschitz, is it time to abandon this? 😂