Bug 310187

Summary: Code completion doesn't work in this case...
Product: [Eclipse Project] JDT Reporter: John Cortell <john.cortell>
Component: CoreAssignee: Ayushman Jain <amj87.iitr>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact:
Severity: normal    
Priority: P3 CC: Olivier_Thomann
Version: 3.6   
Target Milestone: 3.6 M7   
Hardware: PC   
OS: Windows XP   
Whiteboard:
Attachments:
Description Flags
Demo source file none

Description John Cortell CLA 2010-04-22 16:02:37 EDT 
See attached java source file. Code completion on the field fSomeField doesn't work. If I moved the field declaration to the top of the class, it works.

I noticed this on M6. Just tried the latest working Windows integration build (eclipse-SDK-I20100406-1034-win32.zip) and it's broken there, too.
Comment 1 John Cortell CLA 2010-04-22 16:03:12 EDT 
Created attachment 165844 [details]
Demo source file
Comment 2 Olivier Thomann CLA 2010-04-22 18:36:55 EDT 
Ayushman, please investigate.
Comment 3 Ayushman Jain CLA 2010-04-23 13:20:59 EDT 
John, I could not reproduce the problem on HEAD. I get the expected completion at the commented location.

I think this problem is similar to the one fixed along with bug 308980, since it has both a non-array field with an array initializer and an anonymous class. Can you download the latest build and verify? Thanks!
Comment 4 John Cortell CLA 2010-04-23 13:36:45 EDT 
(In reply to comment #3)
> John, I could not reproduce the problem on HEAD. I get the expected completion
> at the commented location.
> 
> I think this problem is similar to the one fixed along with bug 308980, since
> it has both a non-array field with an array initializer and an anonymous class.
> Can you download the latest build and verify? Thanks!

Indeed it is fixed in HEAD. Jeesh. This is the second time in the last six months that I entered a bug against the platform only to find out that it had been fixed very recently. I need to improve my timing and save myself some time :-) Thanks!
Comment 5 John Cortell CLA 2010-04-23 13:37:14 EDT 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 308980 ***