Bug 45169 - Open type dialog does not show all types
Summary: Open type dialog does not show all types
Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME
Alias: None
Product: JDT
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: Core (show other bugs)
Version: 3.0   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P3 normal (vote)
Target Milestone: 3.0 M5   Edit
Assignee: Jerome Lanneluc CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2003-10-19 01:08 EDT by Wassim Melhem CLA
Modified: 2003-10-30 11:34 EST (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:


Attachments
missing type (38.64 KB, image/gif)
2003-10-19 01:09 EDT, Wassim Melhem CLA
no flags Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Wassim Melhem CLA 2003-10-19 01:08:26 EDT
Build: 3.0 M4

I have org.eclipse.pde.ui and org.eclipse.pde.core checked out from CVS and 
all other plug-ins were imported as binary without links.

I opened the "Open type" dialog to open the Java 
class 'SchemaObjectPropertySource' from the pde.ui plug-in.  When typed in 
SchemaObjectProperty in the text field of the dialog, there were no matches.  
Even when I typed the entire name, there was still no match.
I will attach an image showing the dialog with 0 matches.  If you look at the 
tree in the package explorer view on the left, you will see that the type I'm 
looking for and was not found in the dialog is indeed in my workspace.
Comment 1 Wassim Melhem CLA 2003-10-19 01:09:02 EDT
Created attachment 6475 [details]
missing type
Comment 2 Dirk Baeumer CLA 2003-10-27 14:01:36 EST
Asking JDT/Core for comments. We are using the search engine to determine all 
available types.
Comment 3 Wassim Melhem CLA 2003-10-27 14:05:57 EST
This one can be closed.  There was a two-week period when my jdt core metadata 
was flaky.  Once I deleted the metadata and forced re-indexing, everything 
went back to normal.
Comment 4 Philipe Mulet CLA 2003-10-27 15:16:41 EST
Jerome - can you still try to reproduce in latest ? 
Comment 5 Jared Burns CLA 2003-10-28 11:12:38 EST
I see this all the time on the 20031023 build. I didn't do anything to mess up 
my metadata.
Comment 6 Jared Burns CLA 2003-10-28 11:16:42 EST
By the way, is there anything you can do from the workbench to make JDT reindex?
Comment 7 Jerome Lanneluc CLA 2003-10-28 11:30:07 EST
Nothing can be done from the workbench. You have to exit the workbench, go to 
the .metadata, delete the indexes and restart the workbench.

Do you have steps to reproduce the problem?
Comment 8 Jerome Lanneluc CLA 2003-10-30 09:28:14 EST
Please reopen if you have steps to reproduce the problem.
Comment 9 Jared Burns CLA 2003-10-30 10:55:57 EST
But... This bug still exists. It happens to me every day. It definitely doesn't 
"work". :-/
Comment 10 Jerome Lanneluc CLA 2003-10-30 11:04:35 EST
Just prove it :-) I've never seen it, so I need steps to reproduce.
Comment 11 Wassim Melhem CLA 2003-10-30 11:13:36 EST
I had the same problem as Jared for a two week-period.  Even Java search was 
giving me false results all the time.  Much like him, no one believed me :-)  
That is why I attached the screenshot.  That should be enough proof.  However, 
deleting my JDT core metadata and forcing it to re-index solved the problem

However, how did the metadata get corrupted in the first place? That is the 
real question.  It all seemed to happen to me from a fresh workspace 2 days 
prior to 3.0M4.
Comment 12 Jared Burns CLA 2003-10-30 11:20:58 EST
I can attach the appropriate file from my metadata if someone tells me which 
file is relevant.
Comment 13 Jerome Lanneluc CLA 2003-10-30 11:34:07 EST
Wassim, I cannot recall any change in this area before M4. It must be a bug 
that has always existed. Something you did made it appear.

Jared, the problem is not that I don't believe you :-) I'm sure that the 
current state of your metadata indicates that some types are missing. Attaching 
the index would not help us fix the problem. Also have you tried to delete the 
indexes as I mentioned in comment #7? Then restart your workspace (the indexes 
will be recomputed on the next search query) and try to note what steps lead to 
have missing types.