Add padding top if not set already

[AndreasArvidsson]

If the user has not set a padding top add it. Prevent decoration on first row getting cut off.

I found no way of actually setting a default value. Now we check if the user has changed the value and if not set it for them.

fixes: cursorless-dev/cursorless-talon#93

[pokey]

LGTM tho I wanna quick test this one locally to see if that 5px is bothersome at all

[AndreasArvidsson]

@pokey On windows all the snippet tests are now failing for some reason. And only on windows of course

[pokey]

@pokey On windows all the snippet tests are now failing for some reason. And only on windows of course

hmm yeah I noticed that on one of my branches too. This must have just started, because I was able to merge a branch in earlier today. Strange. Does it work locally on Windows?

Strangely, it's green on master as of 1 hour ago. I guess something got updated between then and now?

Let's move this discussion to #388

[pokey]

Do you think we could use this new feature from 1.63.0 to do this one more simply? Just saw it in the release notes. We'd need to set min vscode version to 1.63.0, which is maybe a bit aggressive 4 days after it was released?

[AndreasArvidsson]

I do think that solution is better but wouldn't that require every user have the latest version of vscode? I don't know if everyone always running automatic updates.
At least think which should roll out one solution. I will let you choose which one.

[pokey]

I do think that solution is better but wouldn't that require every user have the latest version of vscode? I don't know if everyone always running automatic updates. At least think which should roll out one solution. I will let you choose which one.

As long as calling paddingConfig.update is not persistent, I'd lean towards avoiding any new APIs at least for another week or two. Alternately, we could leave this PR out of the 0.24.0 release. But if it is non-persistent, then I think I'd be fine shipping this one, esp as it's a fairly modest code change. I'm not seeing a big downside

[AndreasArvidsson]

The implementation in this pr is permanent. We actually updating the users settings.json

[pokey]

Ah ok right. In that case I'd lean towards reworking this one to use the new api, but waiting to merge until after 0.24.0 is released. Make sense?

[AndreasArvidsson]

I think so

[pokey]

I think so

Shall we close this one then? I don't think there will be any code reused in the new implementation