Bug 151731 - make the triggering of the Cross References view more explicit
Summary: make the triggering of the Cross References view more explicit
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: AJDT
Classification: Tools
Component: Core (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified   Edit
Hardware: PC All
: P3 enhancement (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: Steve Young CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2006-07-25 13:53 EDT by Mik Kersten CLA
Modified: 2012-04-03 14:15 EDT (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments
not complete: need to add/change dialog messages (5.84 KB, patch)
2006-09-21 10:37 EDT, Matthew Ford CLA
andrew.eisenberg: iplog+
Details | Diff
Complete fix (without test) for this behaviour (19.39 KB, patch)
2006-10-27 08:39 EDT, Steve Young CLA
no flags Details | Diff
New fix and visual tests (29.58 KB, patch)
2006-11-07 09:47 EST, Steve Young CLA
no flags Details | Diff
Default values added (30.85 KB, patch)
2006-12-11 09:06 EST, Steve Young CLA
no flags Details | Diff
Cumulative patch, incorporating latest requirements (34.34 KB, patch)
2006-12-21 15:49 EST, Steve Young CLA
andrew.eisenberg: iplog+
Details | Diff

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Mik Kersten CLA 2006-07-25 13:53:22 EDT
Instead of automatically opening when first triggered, which is easy to miss, open a dialog that describes its role similar to how perspectives are triggered.  Something like “You have just created an aspect, open the Cross References view in order to see the crosscutting structure of AspectJ Declarations”?  It allows a yes/no choice, and offers the “do not show again” checkbox.  The view is likely to be blank when first opened so stating its role will help.
Comment 1 Matthew Ford CLA 2006-09-21 10:37:41 EDT
Created attachment 50636 [details]
not complete: need to add/change dialog messages
Comment 2 Steve Young CLA 2006-10-27 08:39:43 EDT
Created attachment 52835 [details]
Complete fix (without test) for this behaviour

You don't need the previous patch attached to this bug, as the code has been refactored in to this patch.
Comment 3 Steve Young CLA 2006-11-07 09:47:02 EST
Created attachment 53366 [details]
New fix and visual tests
Comment 4 Matt Chapman CLA 2006-11-17 09:59:21 EST
With the above patch the dialog doesn't seem to trigger for me (although the visual test passes).

Also, I think opening the AspectJ editor would be a better trigger point than creating an aspect, as the user may just be viewing existing code rather than creating a new aspect.
Comment 5 Steve Young CLA 2006-12-11 09:06:38 EST
Created attachment 55398 [details]
Default values added
Comment 6 Steve Young CLA 2006-12-11 09:11:16 EST
The original bug description refers to aspect creation, not the opening of an aspect; this is why the trigger point is not the AspectJ editor. Also, the analagous perspective use case is based on opening the appropriate perspective "when creating a project", as per the the preferences dialog.
Comment 7 Matt Chapman CLA 2006-12-12 06:26:26 EST
The xref view should be opened when it would be useful to the user to do so. As we can't read users' minds we have to go for the closest approximation. A new user's first encounter with an aspect is at least as likely to be viewing one someone else has written as writing one themselves. A trigger point of opening the AspectJ editor covers both cases instead of just creation. A suitable message would be something like "The Cross References view is associated with the AspectJ Editor. It shows the crosscutting structure of AspectJ declarations. Do you want to open this view now?". This also sounds much less like "You appear to be writing an aspect...", which is a good thing :)
Comment 8 Steve Young CLA 2006-12-21 15:49:26 EST
Created attachment 56075 [details]
Cumulative patch, incorporating latest requirements
Comment 9 Steve Young CLA 2006-12-21 15:52:11 EST
OK, with the latest patch the dialog is triggered by opening the AspectJ editor and the message has been amended accordingly.
Comment 10 Matt Chapman CLA 2007-02-26 05:54:35 EST
Patch applied - I think this can be closed now
Comment 11 Steve Young CLA 2007-06-20 11:48:27 EDT
Closing off, as per Matt's comments