A consistent naming scheme for the LanguageService constructors , with backward compatibility functions.

[jurgenvinju]

This renames allmost all language services towards consistency.

All verbs or all nouns did not work.

Instead these are all proper adjectives to the word "service". E.g. "parsing service" and "references service" and "build service". This is also the scheme of the original LSP services. The new scheme is also consistent with the names in Summary of the cached output of the respective lazy services.

This changes:

• parser to parsing .. service
• builder to build .. service
• etc.

TODO's:

• change service names to LSP 3.17 names, one-to-one
• make new pico demo based on new names
• add backward compatibility layer
• fix the field and method and class names correspondingly in Java code
• also apply renamings in Rascal code written for Rascal (e.g. Outline.rsc to DocumentSymbols.rsc)
• test test test
• check all documentation for the old names
• inline the aliases for function profiles of the parameters of the LanguageService constructors (but leave the definitions for backward compatibility. Motivation: the aliases are opaque; you always have to look them up before you can define a language service.
• merge with main
• rename demo modules to make the new API the first choice.

[sungshik]

Great to make this more consistent! I added a few comments, but essentially, my two remaining questions are these:

• Should we also rename arguments to make them consistent with constructors? (e.g., the argument of hover is now documentor)
• Should we also rename everything (well...) in the Java code?

I don't have strong opinions on these questions; just want to raise them for consideration. See the comments for details.

[DavyLandman]

I think we're getting close to a new set of names, but still require some tweaking (most of my comments are replies to points of @sungshik, so better to read it in the "Files Changed" tab).

[sonarcloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
2.9% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud