I have the keyword code completion, but not the variable name, table fields, class methods one.
I want those things too, and i heard it's possible. Does that require some additional tool, or is it a matter of configuration?
Thx, you guys rule!
P.S. version 7.10 for the gui.
It's a matter of the version. For most of the versions out there, only a basic support for code completion is possible because the editor can't "call back" to the server to get the structural information required for the really intelligent stuff. You can try to activate the option "Suggest non-keywords from the text" - YMMV. For the really cool stuff, you need NetWeaver 2007 and up.
Related
I am using IntelliJ with the "compare with file..." function, which is very useful. Unfortunately, it seems to lack fundamentals commands in the right-click menu, like copy-paste and comment/uncomment line
In the merge situation, this is even worse.
Settings doesn't helps
How can I solve the situation and make this window more usable, without being forced for hotkeys/edit sources functionality?
If you want this functionalities to be introduced in IntelliJ without workarounds, please upvote this feature request.
I try to use this 2 projects for primitive gui testing automation:
http://www.ptfbpro.com/
http://www.autoitscript.com/
And I can't make my choice.
Can somebody explain me: why(in 2 or 3 lines) he use one of them(or other please specify)?
I use AutoIt...
because it's free, well documented (not only) from inside of the Scite Editor and you can easily compile your script into a small executable or even create a complete GUI and there is a very good community in the forums and around here. And its Basic-Like Syntax is really easy to understand, there are functions and even a foreach-syntax, dynamic arrays and lots of additional functions from other users... There's good integration with other programming languages and from the use of so many WinAPI functions you lack of very little possibilities. It can automate IE usage without even displaying a browser window and send network packages, you can send Keystrokes like a user sitting in front of your screen and there's the AU3Record Tool which allows you to just record a Macro and replay it or save it as a script and then you can easily optimize it and edit it for your needs. Or use the AutoIt Window Info tool to see all the possible handlings for your application, you can interact with any kind of program output/display according to different algorithms you may invent.
Enough facts? ;-)
Go with Autoit3. It 's a lot more reliable, and you have a complete script language. Ptfbpro is only a tool (not free), nothing more. AUtoit3 has a lot of contributors that can help you in your process, Ptfbpro is dead.
If you want a script taht really do what you want, just go for AutoIt. Ptfbpro can't be used as a professional tool.
Autoit3 as well. You really can't beat it for being free and so easy to use.
I am trying to identify the point in time where code completion (autocomplete/intellisense/whatever) was first introduced in IDEs and would appreciate any pointers.
By code completion here I mean a feature within the editor that suggests methods or functions based on the code that was already typed, and I am interested in programming language related completions (not word processor style completion).
I remember seeing it in Visual Studio and Microsoft Office in the early-nineties, and I don't remember at what point it was introduced, or whether it was actually available in DOS-based IDEs like Turbo Pascal or Turbo C++. On a hunch, I would guess that this was probably introduced in Smalltalk.
For those wondering, I need this information for a research paper and wasn't able to find a credible answer online.
The first IDE that comes on my mind is the IDE of Visual Basic
The Wikipedia article on IntelliSense has a history section and indicates that the first use was in 1996.
VB, Smalltalk, Emacs, Think Pascal, Sun's Forte.
Maybe it worked in some of the early Xerox stuff who knows.
I am quite sure Turbo Pascal had some of these features, and that was even before Windows existed.
Turbo Pascal had auto-indent (woo!) but nothing you'd call auto-complete I don't think.
The first time I ever witnessed auto-complete was circa 1985. It was another pascal development system, with a strange name—maybe it was Alice—at any rate I think it was a woman's name. The editor did auto-indent, auto-completion of control structures (no more typing BEGIN and END), and even some form of syntax coloring. It might have been the first time I saw colors in a code editor.
The screen was stunning! Bland code was suddenly vibrant.
Alas, the product disappeared pretty quick. It was real buggy and drove everybody nuts. It seemed like nothing like it showed up until many years after that.
Edit: It was indeed called Alice, by Looking Glass Software, and I found some info on it here.
see also VB.NET Static Code Anaylsis
For better or for worst we now have a VB.NET coding standards document that is based on a C# coding standard as enforced by StyleCop.
For example
the number of spaces you should put in each side of a “+” sign etc
all instance Members (fields and methods!) must be access as “me.fieldName”
all shared members must be accessed as “className.fieldName”
As I tend to think:
If it’s in a requirements document it
should be check for by an automatic
system
I am looking for (ideally free) tools that will check for that short of rules on VB.NET code, as these are style issues that don’t make it into the compiled output, FxCop is not useful.
(I would personally match rather that we just check for important things like duplicated code and single reasonability for each class (so no more multi thousand line classes!), but as I need to keep to the coding standard document I wish to have a tool to help me do so.)
see also Enforcing using the class name whenever a shared member is accessed.
About the bounty.
I am looking for a list of VB.NET code checking tools, with a short summery of what each tool can do and its limitations. If the tools are not free, please include some ideal of cost.
Does anyone have experience using CodeRush/Refactor! or ReSharper with VB.NET to check for this type of coding style issues?
I know of no free source code analysis tools with good VB support. There are, however, at least two commercial tools that may be suitable:
submain CodeIt.Right
SSW Code Auditor
Personally, I prefer the CodeIt.Right rule authoring mechanism, so I would favour it if considerable custom rule development were planned. However, if you just want to use out-of-the box rules, Code Auditor ships with quite a few more code style rules than CodeIt.Right, most of whose built-in rules target the compiled IL (like FxCop).
The only ones I know of are:
Microsoft's FxCop
Of course, this only operates on compiled assemblies, so doesn't give the same functionality as StyleCop, and certainly won't help with things like naming schemes.
However, the closest thing is:
Aivosto's Project Analyzer v9.0 for Visual Basic, VB.NET and VBA
The full version is not free, but this is the closest thing to StyleCop for VB.NET that I can find.
There have been a number of calls for a VB.NET version of Microsoft's StyleCop, such as those in this thread on the code.msdn.microsoft.com site. That same thread also gives some good insight into why a VB.NET version doesn't exist.
I use ReSharper on a daily basis and I find it fine for both code formatting and for solving naming issues. It allows to configure how naming must be enforced, how issues are displayed (hint, suggestion, warning, etc) and provides a precise code formatter (space, paranthesis, line breaks, this qualifier, etc).
Note that I don't know if it can be run in batch mode.
Turning Option Explicit on by default is always a great idea and should be standard practice. I would argue it should be turned on by default in VS out of the box. But it doesn't come close to enforcing the out of the box rules that StyleCop does for C#, nor does it allow for you to create your own rules.
The whole reason for StyleCop's existence is because FxCop only works on compiled assemblies, leaving web projects out in the cold for a similar tool. With StyleCop, web developers get the same great rule enforcement and tight VS integration. It is a great tool for any C# developer.
It is unfortunate that it is only C# capable, a VB version would satisfy a large community that is left wanting something similar.
There already is a very good style tool built into the VB compiler. It is called Option Explicit On, put it at the top of the source code file or use Tools + Options + Project and Solutions + VB Defaults, Option Explicit = On. If that wasn't turned on previously there could be a mountain of errors when you compile your code after changing that.
If it is clean or already turned on, consider that you are 95% close to writing clean C# code and that the language doesn't really matter anymore.
I think Xcode is a good IDE, but having used Eclipse for Java development in the past I am quite underwhelmed by XCode's code completion and error/warning feedback. (Most of the time, XCode seems to simply try to match the beginning of a text fragment to "words" in the same document, without even using type information to try to determine the appropriateness of a suggested completion.)
Does anyone have ideas or tricks to make XCode approach Eclipse's cleverness, or to realistically develop Cocoa apps with other IDE:s than XCode?
EDIT: Worth keeping an eye on this: code.google.com/p/objectiveclipse/
The good news is, Apple’s working on the problem. One of the goals of the clang compiler project is to create a reusable parser which can be used for better code completion and refactoring support. Indications are that this has borne fruit in the latest Snow Leopard seeds.
Quite simply: no.
You can do almost everything by hand using your favorite text editor but it's not at all recommended. Try designing interfaces without Interface Builder for example.
My advice would be to just stick with Xcode and learn its way of doing things. Yes, it will be different and sometimes might not be "better" in your Eclipsed eyes. Console yourself in the fact that Apple's managed to release some great products using Xcode.
My personal experience is that, each time I use Xcode, I find a new trick which I can add to my bag. Xcode is far more full-featured than what you might think at first (or second) glance.
I've long voiced my rants about what's wrong with Xcode (and what's not wrong with Xcode). But you really don't want to use another tool. And without breaking NDA: Xcode 3.2 with SnowLeopard: Hooray. (Compared to what we have; not compared to what we might want.)
That said, to your original question about code completion, I personally turn off auto-completion in favor of on-demand completion. I find it far more useful and less distracting. In the Code Sense panel, set "Automatically Suggest" to "Never" and make sure the other two options are selected ("Show arguments in pop-up list" and "Insert argument placeholders...") This will do completion in a pop-up box when you hit Escape, making it easy to scroll through looking for what you want. I find that I have to type a lot less this way, especially for methods that are not unique for many characters. 80% of the time, it's highlighting the right thing already.
I have certainly felt your pain — as an experienced Java developer and frequent Eclipse user, I've wished for the same features myself. Unfortunately, I'm not aware of anything that fits the bill. I don't think there was any satisfactory resolution to this SO question, either.
However, I think you'll be quite happy with the improvements to Xcode code completion coming in Snow Leopard — it's vastly smarter about filtering the list of possible completions. Also, there are new conveniences for coding, such as inserting a starting bracket when you forgot one, etc. To my knowledge, there is still no predictive compiling like Eclipse, though.
Is anyone aware of an IDE other than Eclipse that supports predictive compiling and warning/error reporting? Does Eclipse itself support the feature for languages other than Java, such as C++? I'm led to wonder whether the fact that Java is built with independent .java files rather than .h and .c/.cpp/.m files makes it simpler to predictively compile. Also, anything compiled with gcc requires a little more care and attention than the comparatively simpler javac command. Any thoughts?
Check out JetBrains' new IDE called "App Code". It's still in the Early Access Program, but even with the Early Access bugs it is hands-down better than xcode 4.
http://www.jetbrains.com/objc/
emacs and/or vim
Xcode does have some context awareness, when you are sending a message to an object it will generally have the "ESC" list pull up meaningful arguments.
One thing I strongly recommend is looking into text macros. These are not really type aware, but they can save a ton of typing - for instance, after #implementation type "init" and then hit control-. (period) to activate the text macro. It will fill out a whole init method for you. You can create your own, or override the existing macros.