Bug 46761 - Search for references: misses match in Javadoc
Summary: Search for references: misses match in Javadoc
Status: VERIFIED FIXED
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 M6   Edit
Assignee: Frederic Fusier CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2003-11-17 05:20 EST by Dirk Baeumer CLA
Modified: 2003-12-17 06:29 EST (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:

Attachments
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 Dirk Baeumer CLA 2003-11-17 05:20:11 EST 
N20031114

package p2;

public class RefR {
	/**
	 * @see p1.R
	 * @see p1.R#field
	 */
	public void foo() {
	}
}


- search for references to package p1.

Observe: you get a match in @see p1.R but not in @see p1.R#field
Comment 1 Frederic Fusier CLA 2003-11-21 07:26:20 EST 
*** Bug 47209 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 2 Frederic Fusier CLA 2003-11-21 07:34:13 EST 
These kind of see references are considered as message sent and currently we do 
not explicitely resolve the method type during the resolution.

I guess we need to add this explicit resolution to have the type and package 
reference stored in the indexer...
Comment 3 Dirk Baeumer CLA 2003-11-21 12:55:30 EST 
This might be caused by the fact the the field declared in R is private. See 
bug 46760.
Comment 4 Frederic Fusier CLA 2003-11-21 13:11:19 EST 
No, I've tried with field as public and we still don't see the reference to 
p1.R in @see p1.R#field...
Comment 5 Frederic Fusier CLA 2003-12-01 04:49:41 EST 
The reference on field type was not stored and not searched => no chance at all 
to find it...

Fixed for fields and also for methods/constructors references...

No specific tests cases added as tests.model.JavaSearchJavadocTests already 
cover this case. I missed that types should be found in these cases and wrote a 
wrong expected results... This is also fixed for tests now.
Comment 6 David Audel CLA 2003-12-17 06:29:49 EST 
Verified for 3.0M6