Skip to content

Conversation

@ButterSus
Copy link
Contributor

📑 Description

This PR fixes an issue in the Codeium plugin's mini.icons configuration where it was trying to access opts.symbol_map.codeium without first checking if opts.symbol_map exists.

  • Add if not opts.symbol_map then opts.symbol_map = {} end check before setting codeium icon in mini.icons configuration

ℹ Additional Information

This fix prevents an error that would occur when opts.symbol_map is nil, similar to how it's already checked in the lspkind configuration above it.

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Apr 9, 2025

Review Checklist

Does this PR follow the [Contribution Guidelines](development guidelines)? Following is a partial checklist:

Proper conventional commit scoping:

  • If you are adding a new plugin, the scope would be the name of the category it is being added into. ex. feat(utility): added noice.nvim plugin

  • If you are modifying a pre-existing plugin or pack, the scope would be the name of the plugin folder. ex. fix(noice-nvim): fix LSP handler error

  • Pull request title has the appropriate conventional commit type and scope where the scope is the name of the pre-existing directory in the project as described above

  • README is properly formatted and uses fenced in links with <url> unless they are inside a [title](url)

  • Entry returns a single plugin spec with the new plugin as the only top level spec (not applicable for recipes or packs).

  • Proper usage of opts table rather than setting things up with the config function.

  • Proper usage of specs table for all specs that are not dependencies of a given plugin (not applicable for recipes or packs).

@Yorizel
Copy link
Contributor

Yorizel commented Apr 10, 2025

fix the title

@ButterSus ButterSus changed the title fix(codeium): add symbol_map initialization in mini.icons configuration fix(codeium-nvim): add symbol_map initialization in mini.icons configuration Apr 11, 2025
@Uzaaft Uzaaft merged commit 8903b87 into AstroNvim:main Apr 11, 2025
48 of 51 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants