Order of suggestions of code-fixes is not really optimized, especially with imports

Consider the following code:

a/Class1.cs

namespace A
{
    public class Class1
    {
        // code
    }
}

b/Class2.cs

namespace B
{
    public class Class2
    {
        var instance = new Class1();
    }
}

Then put your cursor on Class1() and invoke M-x lsp-execute-code-action in Emacs, or similar action in other editor.

Observed that

You will be provided several different options:

(Screenshot for demonstrationg-purposes. Does not match example code 1-to-1)

Expected that

Generally, in my experience, some actions are almost always “more” preferred than others.

In this particular case I almost always want to have using-statements as first suggestion, explicit-namespacing as second and create new class as third and expect to find code-fixes in that order.

Does the LSP protocol provide any sort of … priority for the code actions or is it up to the LSP-client itself to determine how to present them?

[razzmatazz]

pending on https://github.com/ionide/LanguageServerProtocol/pull/4

[josteink]

This works 100% as I described in the “expected” section in the issue, so I guess I have no choice but consider this 100% resolved 😄