Feature list for 4.0

[Matthew Woehlke]

Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> On 18.06.08 14:59:48, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
>> Hamish Rodda wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 18 June 2008 11:58:03 Matthew Woehlke wrote:
>>>> grep: where are you? I can't find the find+grep integration anywhere
>>> Same as kdev3, it's edit->find in files, or ctrl+alt+f.  if you can't see it, 
>>> your plugin loading is broken and you should look into why your syscoa can't 
>>> see them.
>> Ok, let me rephrase that then. Please bring back the /context menu/ :-). 
>> (I never invoked grep from the menu, always from right-clicking on 
>> something I want to search for.) Jump to Function and friends are also 
>> missing :-(.
> 
> The whole context menu is missing (that is the kdevelop special part).

Indeed, I noticed. Therefore I think "bring back the context menu" is a 
valid request ;-).

> BTW: If the cursor is on some text, you can just Ctrl+Alt+F and it'll
> search for it, a lot faster than context menu ;)

Perhaps I will try to retrain myself.

>>> We're working hard on the quick open stuff.  It doesn't work across the whole 
>>> project because the persistent duchain is not written... patience needed here.
>> I can be patient :-). I'm just saying that, with ctags MIA and quick 
>> open not yet "up to snuff" I'm not ready to call that "releasable", 
> 
> Hope you're aware that we're not targetting KDE 4.1, we're targeting 4.2
> currently.

I'm reacting to 
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.kde.devel.kdevelop/21260, which is 
of course out of date, but still made me go "you're not serious, right?" 
:-). Obviously expectations are, if you'll pardon me for saying it, more 
realistic now than when Matt asked that.

>> since it's a pretty big hole in function. Don't get me wrong, I 
>> understand that there's a lot of work to do (and I'm impressed with the 
>> progress so far!), it's just when I see Matt asking "why can't we 
>> release" that I go "you're kidding, right?" :-). (Ok, I guess kdevelop 
>> as-is is /functional/, just missing some important bits that 3.x has.)
> 
> It actually really is, besides being a bit slow on my machine in general
> (mostly thats kate's fault though). Quick-Open does work quite well
> already, including all project files and classes. BTW: I suggest to only
> turn on "Project" scope in quick-open, thats a _lot_ faster than if you
> have "included files" and the other option on (which IIRC is the
> default).

Will make a note to check, but my "project" is still nearly the size of 
kdelibs, and I *need* quick-open to work on all of that.

If it's any perspective, my ctags file (getting out of date, but we're 
not exactly adding new symbols left and right) for the project is 53k lines.

> Thats the project tree. I don't see a comeback of the general purpose
> file-tree we had in kdevelop3.

That's... unfortunate, given I still have several complaints about it 
relative to file tree. No bolding of project files, no hiding 
non-project files, not horizontally scrollable, needs an extra 
indentation level, keeps wanting to eat up 1/3 of the vertical space 
with a pane I don't need at the bottom...

...or add those features, along with the ability to expand folders 
in-place, to file system. Actually I think that would be better, because 
you can "root" it wherever works best.

Right now the ability to navigate files feeels noticeably worse than in 
3.x. Maybe eventually quick open will compensate for that, but quick 
open isn't there yet either.

>> As I said, project view is halfway there... I can live with the 
>> sort-by-type, 
>> but the extra indentation 
> 
> ?? What indentation do you mean?

The top-level is "default" (I guess that's the project name or build 
configuration or something). The folders under that are indented one 
level, where they weren't in file tree. Maybe that's needed by the view, 
but it's still 2-3 characters wider I have to make the pane.

>> and lack of horizontal scrolling 
> 
> Hmm, my projectree does have horizontal scrollbars. Did I miss
> something?

Got me... My project view certainly has no horizontal scroll bar, and as 
a result likes to truncate file names. I'd attach a screen shot, except 
I'd have to either make a KDE project first (don't have any kdevelop4 
projects for KDE yet) or else go through a bunch of effort blurring 
names... Let me know if I should do one of those, though.

>> are sub-optimal. Plus it has that lower pane that insists on sucking up 
>> valuable space.
> 
> Check out the little green arrow, yes that one you're looking at now.
> Try to click it and voila the buildset stuff is hidden.

Yeah, I know. Would be nice if kdevelop would remember that I don't want 
to see that :-).

>> Project view doesn't seem to have this either??)
> 
> For now the project managers add all files in the directories to the
> project tree, so everything you see in the project tree belongs to the
> project. The problem is that at least cmake and mostly also plain
> Makefile's don't have enough information to properly add the header
> files of a project to the projecttree. This means you won't have
> quick-open on it and possibly some more problems. Besides the
> projecttree looks rather funny with "just" dirs+targets+cpp files.

Ouch. 3.x with manually maintained file lists was much better here, 
especially for esoteric build systems (or even e.g. cmake that's not 
well handled by the built-in project managers).

In case you haven't guessed, I hardly used the project manager stuff in 
3.x; not for the main projects I work on, anyway.

>> Oh, and the way project view tries too hard to keep the selection 
>> visible is REALLY annoying :-). Try to dig out a file somewhere well 
>> off-screen of the current selection and you'll see what I mean.
> 
> Your build is old ;) That doesn't happen anymore - or rather it should
> not. Hamish keeps saying it happens for him, but I can't reproduce that
> anymore since I removed a few uneeded methods from the treeview.

I didn't realize 24 hours was "old" already? I updated and built my 
entire KDE tree, from support to kdevelop, last night (unless it's 
qt-copy that changed?), and I still see the problem in an instance I 
started after I began typing this reply.

-- 
Matthew
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so. -- Ford Prefect (Douglas 
Adams' HHGttG)