Repository navigation
duplicate-set-field diagnostic when assigning a function to a table field #2551
Description
How are you using the lua-language-server?
Visual Studio Code Extension (sumneko.lua)
Which OS are you using?
Windows
What is the issue affecting?
Diagnostics/Syntax Checking
Expected Behaviour
No diagnostic warning on assignment because the variable has been 'cleared'.
Actual Behaviour
The two info.func assignments that are "= function" get a Duplicate field 'func' (duplicate-set-field) diagnostic.
The info.func assignment "= l1" does not.
Scope depth does not seem to impact the diagnostic - within the same function.
Assignments to other fields that are string, integer, etc do not get the diagnostic.
FYI - the ".func" is expected in a library I cannot change.
Reproduction steps
local function l1()
end
local function f1()
local info = {};
do
info = {};
info.notCheckable = true
info.func = function()
-- any code
end
end
info = {};
info.notCheckable = true
info.func = function()
-- any code
end
info = {};
info.notCheckable = true
info.func = l1
end
Additional Notes
No response
Log File
No response
Activity
pearagit commentedon Apr 5, 2024
chiming in that I also experience this
serialnumbers commentedon Oct 24, 2026
I hit a related case with the official LÖVE addon installed through the VS Code addon manager (Lua extension 3.19.2). The addon library declares the callback as an API stub (
function love.load(arg, unfilteredArg) endinlibrary/love.lua), and a normal project implementation such asfunction love.load() ... endis then reported asDuplicate field "load"(duplicate-set-field). This is not a duplicate at runtime: the addon declaration is metadata/API information, while the project function implements the LÖVE callback. The same issue applies to callbacks such aslove.draw/love.update. It appears the diagnostic is treating the metadata stub as a conflicting project definition. Workaround is disablingduplicate-set-field, but that suppresses useful warnings workspace-wide. Could meta/addon definitions be excluded when checking duplicate field assignments, or callback override/implementation be recognized?