Bug 342348 - Camel case matches not work when "::" as trigger
Summary: Camel case matches not work when "::" as trigger
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: CDT
Classification: Tools
Component: cdt-core (show other bugs)
Version: 8.0   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows 7
: P3 normal (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: Project Inbox CLA
QA Contact: Jonah Graham CLA
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2011-04-09 04:04 EDT by Loaden CLA
Modified: 2020-09-04 15:17 EDT (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments
Screenshot for this issue (31.25 KB, image/png)
2011-04-09 04:06 EDT, Loaden CLA 		no flags Details
View All Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Loaden CLA 2011-04-09 04:04:57 EDT 
Build Identifier: I20110310-1119

Hi, CDT Term!
Nice to see the new feature "Show camel case matches" has enabled.
I found a bug is this feature.
---
namespace ATL
{
class CAxWindow {};
class CAxWindowEx {};
class CWindow {};
}
ATL:: // Issue occured here
---
If auto activation using "::" trigger, Camel case matches will not work.
And this code:
---class CAxWindow {};
class CAxWindowEx {};
class CWindow {};

::CWi // Issue occured here
CWi // Works well
--
If using "::" as trigger, Camel case matches not work too.

Reproducible: Always
Comment 1 Loaden CLA 2011-04-09 04:06:24 EDT 
Created attachment 192887 [details]
Screenshot for this issue
Comment 2 Markus Schorn CLA 2011-04-12 09:46:38 EDT 
Do you mean by 'Camel case matches will not work'? Is it that the order of the proposals is unexpected?
Comment 3 Loaden CLA 2011-04-12 10:12:39 EDT 
(In reply to comment #2)
> Do you mean by 'Camel case matches will not work'? Is it that the order of the
> proposals is unexpected?

Not only the order of questions, but the algorithm fails to match.
Comment 4 Markus Schorn CLA 2011-04-12 10:18:28 EDT 
(In reply to comment #3)
> Not only the order of questions, but the algorithm fails to match.
Please explain that to me: What are the proposals you are seeing, what are the ones you would expect instead?
Comment 5 Loaden CLA 2011-04-15 08:04:30 EDT 
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > Not only the order of questions, but the algorithm fails to match.
> Please explain that to me: What are the proposals you are seeing, what are the
> ones you would expect instead?

Please see the attachment of Screenshot:
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/attachment.cgi?id=192887
When I typing:
ATL:CWindow
It's should proposals CWindow, but not CAxWindow, That's right?
You can test this issue use the demo:

namespace ATL
{
class CAxWindow {};
class CAxWindowEx {};
class CWindow {};
}

ATL::CWin | // type here

Sorry for my poor english.
Comment 6 Markus Schorn CLA 2011-04-15 09:52:15 EDT 
I understand, I raised the same concern about the implementation in bug 173458, however this is done on purpose.
Comment 7 Jens Elmenthaler CLA 2011-04-15 10:05:52 EDT 
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > (In reply to comment #3)
> > > Not only the order of questions, but the algorithm fails to match.
> > Please explain that to me: What are the proposals you are seeing, what are the
> > ones you would expect instead?
> Please see the attachment of Screenshot:
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/attachment.cgi?id=192887
> When I typing:
> ATL:CWindow
> It's should proposals CWindow, but not CAxWindow, That's right?
I really consider this a feature:-), which is that you don't have to specify all the segments, but can leave out some in between. It frequently annoys me in the JDT, for example. But there is a certain cost you have to pay, maybe the ordering should be tweaked.