Community
Participate
Working Groups
Created attachment 185105 [details] Remove Obsolete Language Features - Refactoring Enhancement (Patch) This enhancement request contains the code for 3 additional "Remove Obsolete Language Feature" refactorings for the Photran editor. The included path file contains the code for the implemented features as well as automated tests for their behavior. The 3 refactorings are: 1) Removing Branches to END IF Statements 2) Removing Real and Double Precision DO Loop Counters 3) Removing PAUSE Statements More details about the refactorings and their implementation can be found on our development wiki here: https://agora.cs.illinois.edu/display/cs427fa10/AvocadoChestnut Affected files from original Photran Installation are: • org.eclipse.photran.core.vpg Package – Core refactoring code. - src/org/eclipse/phoran/internal/core/refactoring Directory RemoveBranchToEndIfRefactoring.java RemovePauseStmtRefactoring.java RemoveRealAndDoublePrecisionLoopCountersRefactoring.java Messages.java - src/org/eclipse/phoran/internal/core/refactoring/infrastructure Directory FortranResourceRefactoring.java • org.eclipse.photran.core.vpg.tests Package – Refactoring test suite and test cases. (test cases in directories now shown.) - src/org/eclipse/phoran/internal/tests/refactoring Directory RemoveBranchToEndIfTestSuite.java RemovePauseStmtTestSuite.java RemoveRealandDoublePrecisionLoopCountersTestSuite.java - refactoring-test-code Directory remove-branch-to-end-if Directory remove-pause-stmt Directory remove-real-and-double-precision-loop-counters Directory org.eclipse.photran.ui.vpg Package – Contains GUI messages and menu extensions for refactorings. - src/org.eclipse.photran.internal.ui.refactoring Directory plugin.xml RemoveRealAndDoublePrecisionLoopCounterInputPage.java Messages.java Message.properties
Thanks for the contribution! It looks good overall; I have just a few minor changes I would like for you to make before we can submit this for an IP review. Please re-submit the patch with the following changes: 1. Please fill out the @author tags in the JavaDoc comments for the following classes: - RemoveBranchToEndIfTestSuite - RemovePauseStmtTestSuite - RemoveRealAndDoublePrecisionLoopCountersTestSuite 2. Please fix the @author tag (it appears to be incorrect) for RemoveRealAndDoublePrecisionLoopCountersInputPage 3. Please remove or comment out all calls to System.out.println. (The refactoring should not have terminal output in production.) Thanks a lot!
Created attachment 185107 [details] Updated Patch File - Addressing Jeff's Review on 12-13-10 Updated Patch File - Addressing Jeff's Review on 12-13-10
Thanks Jeff for the quick review. All your issues have been addressed and a new patch file uploaded as a new attachment. Please let us know if anything else should be changed and we'll address it asap. (In reply to comment #1) > Thanks for the contribution! It looks good overall; I have just a few minor > changes I would like for you to make before we can submit this for an IP > review. Please re-submit the patch with the following changes: > > 1. Please fill out the @author tags in the JavaDoc comments for the following > classes: > - RemoveBranchToEndIfTestSuite > - RemovePauseStmtTestSuite > - RemoveRealAndDoublePrecisionLoopCountersTestSuite > > 2. Please fix the @author tag (it appears to be incorrect) for > RemoveRealAndDoublePrecisionLoopCountersInputPage > > 3. Please remove or comment out all calls to System.out.println. (The > refactoring should not have terminal output in production.) > > Thanks a lot!
Thanks! (Wow, that was fast...) The revised patch looks good. Rita, Nicola, Jerry, Mark, and Chamil, can the five of you *each* please confirm (as a comment on this bug) that 1. you wrote 100% of the code without incorporating content from elsewhere or relying on the intellectual property of others, 2. you have the right to contribute the code to Eclipse, and 3. you have included the EPL license header in all source files?
(In reply to comment #4) > Thanks! (Wow, that was fast...) The revised patch looks good. > > Rita, Nicola, Jerry, Mark, and Chamil, can the five of you *each* please > confirm (as a comment on this bug) that > > 1. you wrote 100% of the code without incorporating content from elsewhere or > relying on the intellectual property of others, Yes (Mark Mozolewski) > 2. you have the right to contribute the code to Eclipse, and Yes (Mark Mozolewski) > 3. you have included the EPL license header in all source files? Yes (Mark Mozolewski)
Confirm (as a comment on this bug) that: > 1. you wrote 100% of the code without incorporating content from elsewhere or > relying on the intellectual property of others, Yes (Mark Mozolewski) > 2. you have the right to contribute the code to Eclipse, and Yes (Mark Mozolewski) > 3. you have included the EPL license header in all source files? Yes (Mark Mozolewski)
Thanks, Mark. Rita, Nicola, Jerry, and Chamil, I will need the four of you to make similar confirmations as well...
Created attachment 185108 [details] User's Guide For Remove Obsolete Language Features Refactorings User's Guide For 3 Refactorings included as part of this enhancement request.
> (In reply to comment #4) > > Thanks! (Wow, that was fast...) The revised patch looks good. > > > > Rita, Nicola, Jerry, Mark, and Chamil, can the five of you *each* please > > confirm (as a comment on this bug) that > > > > 1. you wrote 100% of the code without incorporating content from elsewhere or > > relying on the intellectual property of others, > > Yes (Chamil Wijenayaka) > > > 2. you have the right to contribute the code to Eclipse, and > > Yes (Chamil Wijenayaka) > > > 3. you have included the EPL license header in all source files? > > Yes (Chamil Wijenayaka) > (In reply to comment #4) > > Thanks! (Wow, that was fast...) The revised patch looks good. > > > > Rita, Nicola, Jerry, Mark, and Chamil, can the five of you *each* please > > confirm (as a comment on this bug) that > > > > 1. you wrote 100% of the code without incorporating content from elsewhere or > > relying on the intellectual property of others, > > Yes (Mark Mozolewski) > > > 2. you have the right to contribute the code to Eclipse, and > > Yes (Mark Mozolewski) > > > 3. you have included the EPL license header in all source files? > > Yes (Mark Mozolewski)
(In reply to comment #9) > > (In reply to comment #4) > > > Thanks! (Wow, that was fast...) The revised patch looks good. > > > > > > Rita, Nicola, Jerry, Mark, and Chamil, can the five of you *each* please > > > confirm (as a comment on this bug) that > > > > > > 1. you wrote 100% of the code without incorporating content from elsewhere or > > > relying on the intellectual property of others, > > > > Yes (Chamil Wijenayaka) > > > > > 2. you have the right to contribute the code to Eclipse, and > > > > Yes (Chamil Wijenayaka) > > > > > 3. you have included the EPL license header in all source files? > > > > Yes (Chamil Wijenayaka) > > > > (In reply to comment #4) > > > Thanks! (Wow, that was fast...) The revised patch looks good. > > > > > > Rita, Nicola, Jerry, Mark, and Chamil, can the five of you *each* please > > > confirm (as a comment on this bug) that > > > > > > 1. you wrote 100% of the code without incorporating content from elsewhere or > > > relying on the intellectual property of others, > > > > Yes (Mark Mozolewski) > > > > > 2. you have the right to contribute the code to Eclipse, and > > > > Yes (Mark Mozolewski) > > > > > 3. you have included the EPL license header in all source files? > > > > Yes (Mark Mozolewski) > > > 1. you wrote 100% of the code without incorporating content from elsewhere or > > > relying on the intellectual property of others, > > > > Yes (Rita Chow) > > > > > 2. you have the right to contribute the code to Eclipse, and > > > > Yes (Rita Chow) > > > > > 3. you have included the EPL license header in all source files? > > > > Yes (Rita Chow)
As soon as I get confirmations from Nicola and Jerry, I can start the IP process...
> 1. you wrote 100% of the code without incorporating content from elsewhere or > relying on the intellectual property of others, Yes (Jerry Hsiao) > 2. you have the right to contribute the code to Eclipse, and Yes (Jerry Hsiao) > 3. you have included the EPL license header in all source files? Yes (Jerry Hsiao)
(In reply to comment #4) > Thanks! (Wow, that was fast...) The revised patch looks good. > Rita, Nicola, Jerry, Mark, and Chamil, can the five of you *each* please > confirm (as a comment on this bug) that > 1. you wrote 100% of the code without incorporating content from elsewhere or > relying on the intellectual property of others, [yes] > 2. you have the right to contribute the code to Eclipse, and [yes] > 3. you have included the EPL license header in all source files? [yes]
Thanks for the replies! For the IP review, I will need to describe how much of the work was done by each person involved. Generally, for CS427 projects, the work was more-or-less evenly distributed, so I will use the following breakdown unless you inform me otherwise: Rita Chow - 20% Nicola Hall - 20% Jerry Hsiao - 20% Mark Mozolewski - 20% Chamil Wijenayaka - 20% I'll start the IP review process soon. If the IP team has any questions, I'll post them here.
CQ 4702 Submitted - https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4702
The CQ was approved. CVS check-in is pending.
These are committed to CVS HEAD for inclusion in Photran 7.0/Indigo (the June, 2011 release). Thanks again for the contribution! Please also make sure your names are all included and are spelled correctly on the Contributors page: http://www.eclipse.org/photran/contributors.php
