Community
Participate
Working Groups
project A and B opened. working set contains only project B. in project A, some class x, has e.printStackTrace() in it. right-click "printStackTrace", search reference in working set above (B). it returns no results, although the project B contains many printStackTrace(); goto project B, find an example of printStackTrace, and search again but in workspace. Returns results (granted you create some!)
on M5
Thomas, search is your domain (and: would this go into platform search or jdt-something?).
Philippe, could you comment if that's the expected behaviour? Please send back to us (jdt ui) if not.
Feels like our bug.
I've tried this with a simple test and it works fine for me. There are many implementors of printStackTrace(). By asking for references to a specific one, you are asking for senders which not only match the method name but also the receiver type. So what happens if you right-click "printStackTrace" and search for references in the workspace & not the working set B... does it find references in the project B, that are not found in the working set search?
please re-read the bug report. I just said that searching in workspace does report result. you have to select the printStackTrace() (to start the search) on a class NOT in the working set. In the current case, the class x is in project A. working set is only project B.
Well actually you said: 1. in project A, some class x, has e.printStackTrace() in it. 2. right-click "printStackTrace", search reference in working set above (B). it returns no results, although the project B contains many printStackTrace(); 3. goto project B, find an example of printStackTrace, and search again but in workspace. Returns results (granted you create some!) You did NOT say in step #2 that you found references in project B by searching the workspace with the EXACT same method in class x from project A.
Please reopen when you answer Kent's question.
I don't understand Kent's question, if there is any. I'm talking to humans, not machines. I'm allowed to imprecisions sometimes... Sorry. But anyway, once again, a bug, this bug, got magically fixed. I use post-m5 i2003-12-11 and it works fine.
Sorry if I upset you (I didn't mean too). Thank you for verifying this works in I20031211. Can I close this bug as WORKSFORME?
I guess I can close it since there was no response in more than a month.
