Summary: | [Formatter] Wrap when necessary too aggressive on short qualifiers | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Eclipse Project] JDT | Reporter: | Christopher Oezbek <bugzilla> | ||||||
Component: | Core | Assignee: | Frederic Fusier <frederic_fusier> | ||||||
Status: | VERIFIED FIXED | QA Contact: | |||||||
Severity: | normal | ||||||||
Priority: | P3 | CC: | acabler, bokowski, daniel_megert, eclipse.daniel.aborg, eclipse, eclipse, johan.walles, john.cortell, markus.kell.r, mauritz.lovgren, nils.hammar, oliver, Olivier_Thomann, ric.almeida, satyam.kandula, srikanth_sankaran, trevorj | ||||||
Version: | 3.4 | ||||||||
Target Milestone: | 3.6 M5 | ||||||||
Hardware: | PC | ||||||||
OS: | Windows XP | ||||||||
Whiteboard: | |||||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Christopher Oezbek
2009-02-08 19:21:06 EST
This goes in the lines of what I would like to see improved in the line wrapping for 3.6. Created attachment 155131 [details] Proposed patch This patch fixes the problem in the peculiar case of comment 0 and does not need any new preference. I preferred to fix it this way as I think the formatter already has enough preferences and adding a new one should be motivated by a real need. I've run all JDT Core, UI and Text tests using this patch and I only observed one failure in the UI test which is a logical consequence of the fix. I'll add a specific patch to fix the UI test... Note that I also ran formatter massive tests, but there are too many changes to verify them all (a little bit more than 5,000 CUs had a different output with this patch...!). However, for all CUs I have verified (around half of them!), the difference were also logical consequence of the fix and definitely improved the formatter output :-) Created attachment 155132 [details]
Proposed patch to fix the failure in JDT-UI test
(In reply to comment #3) > Created an attachment (id=155132) [details] [diff] > Proposed patch to fix the failure in JDT-UI test Looks good, thanks. Please ping me when you release the Core part, so I can follow for the same N-build. (In reply to comment #2) > Created an attachment (id=155131) [details] > Proposed patch > Released for 3.6M5 in HEAD stream. Verified for 3.6M5 using Build id: I20100122-0800 Verified. Thanks guys for fixing this issue! Looking forward for 3.6M5 Take care and greetings from Berlin, Christopher *** Bug 214743 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 130471 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 83915 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 143634 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 99026 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 189983 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 104004 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 104774 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 114639 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 117896 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 147623 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 196563 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 197155 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** |