Structural search in IntelliJ IDEA is not only powerful, but also not trivial at all to get right. Now when I have created a working template of my own, I might want to use it in multiple projects.
I do not see a way to save globally. Is there anything I can do short of copying the relevant bits from one workspace.xml to another?
Unfortunatelly, it's not supported at the moment, please follow this feature request for updates.
Related
I have multiple projects that I want to share a similar .clang-format style, but I also want to be able to make minor tweaks between each project so they can be slightly different from one another if needed. Currently each project just has the same .clang-format file copied and pasted into its own repository, but it feels wrong because all of the style options are just duplicated from project to project and if I need to change one option I need to go across all projects and manually change it in all of them.
I would like to create my own style that can be used with the "BasedOnStyle" option (See here for more info). That way I can specify that I want all of these projects to be based on the same custom style that would be kept in a shared location, and then I could easily override any project specific options on a per-project basis.
As far as I can tell, there doesn't appear to be any way to create your own style and save it so other projects can be based on the same style. I feel like this is something a lot of users would need (for example if a company wanted to define their own master style that all projects should follow there doesn't appear to be a good way to do it).
Has anyone else run into this problem and found a good solution?
I reached out to the llvm-dev email list and got a response. A feature request is in the works to do something similar to what I want, but not exactly the same. Either way, this should be suitable for my needs when it becomes available.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D93844
I am using a command line tool (ng-xi18n) to extract the i18n strings from an angular 2 app I wrote. The output of this command is a messages.xlf file. Coming from a .po background, and being not familiar with .xlf, I assumed that this file is the equivalent to the .pot file (correct me if I am wrong).
I then assumed that if I want to translate my app, I had to cp messages.xlf messages.de.xlf to have a copy (messages.de.xlf) of the template file (messages.xlf) where I can translate each message into German (hence the .de.xlf).
After translating some dummy texts and running the app, I saw that it worked as expected, so I quit translating and continued developing the app. After some time, I added more i18n strings, and eventually thought that I had to update my template. And this is where things got hardly maintainable. I updated the template messages.xlf file, and quickly was wondering how I could update the new strings to my already translated messages.de.xlf file without loosing my progress.
When I was developing using .po files, this was no problem thanks to good tools like poEdit, but I didn't find anything comparable for .xlf. After trying some tools, I thought that the best choice would be Lokalize, but I didn't find a possibility to merge the template file to already translated (but outdated) files either.
Up to now, this was rather an essay than a question, so here's a quick summary:
Is the workflow of dealing with .xlf files really comparable to .po as I initially thought (described above), or is it completely different?
How am I suppose to update my already translated files?
What are the best practices dealing with .xlf files?
What are proof of concept tools to work with .xlf?
Sidenotes:
The Lokalize handbook was not helpful at all. I see a lot of functions that sound promising, like:
"File" > "Update file from template". I did not find anything in the handbook to explain this function. If I click on this, nothing happens.
"Sync" > "Open file for sync/merge". This seems to be a function to merge two similar files (by multiple translators) rather than a tool to update the translation file from a template. Even though there is a tooltip in Lokalize's primary sync tab, notifying me about "x unmatched entries", I just couldn't find anything to append those unmatched entries to my .de.xlf file.
[Update] Turns out, I had similar issues as in this question. After downgrading my version of Lokalize to the suggested one, many issues (including the ones mentioned in the question) disappeared. However, now the "Update file from template" option is greyed out, and I don't know why.
I also tried OmegaT, which does not work at all on my platform (Ubuntu 16.04).
[Update] Virtaal works great for merging new strings from a template, but the UI in general is very poorly designed...
Googling did not help, as every hit seems to be related to XCode or something.
Thanks for any help in advance, I really appreciate it
I wrote a small npm command line tool called xliffmerge.
In principle it does the same, that Roland Oldengarm does with his gulp tasks described in his blog article.
It is free and you can have a look at it at https://github.com/martinroob/ngx-i18nsupport#readme
The best workflow automation solution I have seen described so far is from Roland Oldengarm's blog entry "Angular 2: Automated i18n workflow using gulp". To summarize, in a few dozen lines of Gulp code he created the tooling to handle some of the challenges you faced. Specifically it runs ng-xi18n to extract the messages; creates an English translation with sources copied to targets; updates existing translations by adding new trans-units, keeping existing ones, and removing missing ones; and then exposes all xlf files as TypeScript string constants. These last strings can then be imported to supply the bootstrapModule with its translation provider options.
Caveat: I have not used this exact solution (and code) myself, but I was able to expose generated xlf as TypeScript strings and use them in an app in a manner similar to what he described. As for maintaining translations, I have leveraged IntelliJ IDEA (WebStorm) file comparison features and Counterparts Lite (for Mac) for that. My own efforts are still in early stages but are working end to end for an application that is in active development.
Official Angular docs are now updated for Internationalization (i18n) at https://angular.io/docs/ts/latest/cookbook/i18n.html including a section specifically for creating a translation source file with the ng-xi18n tool.
I am working with a big project on my IDEA with many modules. I would like to compare files and directories in the project view. Scrolling each time just to select the files for comparison is tedious. I am not using scroll from source so what I wanted to have is two views of the project, each one is scrolled to different files.
Is there a way to achieve that? Or any other alternative?
The closest you can get is the favourites view where you can drop individual files into a list and then compare them without having to scroll around the project view. Unfortunately that is only any use if you are comparing the same sets of files each time.
Unfortunately there is no out of the box way to do that, IDEA can run multiple instances, each with a different project, but switching is kind of painful.
One workaround is to import multiple maven projects as a modules of one project as described in this question.
There is an issue for that feature in the JetBrains issue tracker, it is interesting to read the conversation history there. Currently it seems JetBrains do not plan to implement this feature anywhere in the future.
...it makes no sense in IDEA. Unlike other platform-based IDEs, IDEA
supports multi-module projects, and all the contents displayed in a
single frame are modules of a single project. Introducing an extra
level of hierarchy above that would be unnecessary and extremely
confusing.
...
We don't have any plans to provide any other solution for this. The
1:1 correspondence between projects and frames is essential to the
internal design of IntelliJ IDEA: by definition, a project is the set
of code opened in a single frame. There is no way to change this
without rewriting the whole IDE, which we don't plan to do.
There was such view in intelliJ called Commander. Since last versions it's not shipped together with intelliJ, but you can install it as a plugin.
I think it will be helpful for your case.
I have a package that contains lots of classes, each having lots of annotations. Is there any way to delete all the annotations automatically, rather than manually deleting them one by one?
I'm using the latest version of IntelliJ IDEA. I cannot use search and replace, because there are a lot of different annotations.
IntelliJ has a feature called Structural Search and Replace. You could use it to find all annotations and replace with nothing. I have never really used this feature so can't offer you the exact search you need to use. The best I can offer is a link to the documentation for this feature. I am sure this feature can do what you want though:
http://www.jetbrains.com/idea/webhelp/structural-search-and-replace.html
I have some Cucumber scenarios, for which I created the following files:
create_extended_search.feature
activate_extended_search.feature
edit_extended_search.feature
delete_extended_search.feature
Within these files, I have several scenarios.
Three of the files use the same background, and it would be nice to be able to place it into one file (e.g. support/backgrounds.rb) and then reference it from the feature files.
Is this possible somehow? Thanks.
I believe you would have to create a step that is made up of the steps in your current background. Then call that step in the background for each feature.
There's no notion of 'include'ing feature files in Cucumber. As Justin points out, you can create a single step representing what you want as a background, and call that where appropriate. An alternative is to use a Before hook to perform certain tasks in advance of scenarios that you mark with a specific tag.
Personally, I'd treat this problem as something of a red flag, and start asking if my feature files were split up in the best way possible. Frequently if I find myself bemoaning the inability to include other feature files, or conversely, wishing I could exclude certain scenarios from running my background, it's a very strong sign that my feature files are too finely sliced up, or I'm trying to cram unrelated functionality together and need to split it up further.