DocumentChange unpractical for signature assistant

[Milian Wolff]

David Nolden, 06.07.2010:
> You anyway need the exact range that you want to replace, so I don't see
> the problem specific to DocumentChange. You can simply read the old text
> from the range out of the editor. That somewhat defeats the purpose
> 'safety', as it might happen that you replace _anything_. Your idea with
> the AST would be the best, but might be some work. It's the only way to
> reliably get the whole range that needs to be replaced.

Indeed, my mail title was wrong with making DocumentChange responsible for it. 
I will of course still use it, just the idea on how to find the range is 
currently a bit wrong.

I've now started with the regexp thingy and createCodeRepresentation, which I 
remembered just now. If that works well enough, I'll keep it, otherwise I'll 
use the AST after all.

Bye

> Am 06.07.2010 12:25 schrieb "Milian Wolff" <mail at milianw.de>:
> 
> Hey there,
> 
> while trying to revive the SignatureAssistant for changes in the return
> type,
> I saw (again, had the same problems with constness) that DocumentChange is
> totally unpractical here.
> 
> The thing is that for safety reasons we need to _exact_ old string and then
> replace that or parts of it with changes. Sounds nice. But: We don't access
> the acutal written document, hence only "guess" how the old signature
> looked like and try to replace it. Meaning:
> 
> void foo() const;
> 
> => works (one space, then const)
> 
> void foo()\tconst
> => won't work and similar
> 
> With return type it's even harder, since one does not now whether we have:
> 
> returntype ClassName::methodName() {}
> 
> returntype SomeNamespace::ClassName::methodName() {}
> 
> returntype someTypeDef::ClassName::methodName() {}
> 
> and so forth.
> 
> The parameters at least know the range they replace (the Function context)
> and
> ignore the old text. For the other parts this is not possible. So what
> should
> we do here?
> 
> 1) get AST for document and replace on that, might be slow - advantage:
> completely safe to replace
> 
> Since that's API/code wise easy to implement, I'm actually tempted to use
> that
> for now.
> 
> 2) only get the line of the signature to change and use regex to find
> ranges for DocumentChange, i.e.:
> 
> ^\s*\bOLDRETTYPE\b\s+(\w+)::FUNCNAME(.*)\s*(const)?\s*{?$
> 
> might need to handle comments though. That would be "fast", but I don't
> know what the best way is to get the string for a line in a document,
> considering it might not yet be opened. Ideas? I could just create a
> KateDocument but that
> might do too much, do we have something else?
> 
> Bye
> --
> Milian Wolff
> mail at milianw.de
> http://milianw.de
> 
> --
> KDevelop-devel mailing list
> KDevelop-devel at kdevelop.org
> https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinfo/kdevelop-devel


-- 
Milian Wolff
mail at milianw.de
http://milianw.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kdevelop-devel/attachments/20100706/c518cc64/attachment.sig>