Bug 497142 - Make ability to not propose class names from a non-capital letter.
Summary: Make ability to not propose class names from a non-capital letter.
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: JDT
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: Core (show other bugs)
Version: 4.6   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows 10
: P3 enhancement (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: JDT-Core-Inbox CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2016-07-01 06:32 EDT by Yauheniy Ratkevich CLA
Modified: 2016-07-04 04:33 EDT (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments
Example (10.59 KB, image/png)
2016-07-01 14:18 EDT, Yauheniy Ratkevich CLA 		no flags Details
Example2 (25.96 KB, image/png)
2016-07-01 14:19 EDT, Yauheniy Ratkevich 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 Yauheniy Ratkevich CLA 2016-07-01 06:32:08 EDT 
Make ability to not propose class names from a non-capital letter.
For example do not propose class with such names: "mySystemClass".


-- Configuration Details --
Product: Eclipse 4.6.0.20160613-1800 (org.eclipse.epp.package.jee.product)
Installed Features:
 org.eclipse.jdt 3.12.0.v20160606-1100
Comment 1 Stephan Herrmann CLA 2016-07-01 13:39:38 EDT 
Are you requesting this as a filter for completion (Ctrl+Space)?
If so, why should classes with such names not be referenced?
Isn't the creation of such classes the problem, not referencing?
Comment 2 Yauheniy Ratkevich CLA 2016-07-01 14:17:33 EDT 
(In reply to Stephan Herrmann from comment #1)
> Are you requesting this as a filter for completion (Ctrl+Space)?
> If so, why should classes with such names not be referenced?
> Isn't the creation of such classes the problem, not referencing?

I don't mean to forbid referencing to such classes forever, I mean just to have an ability to do it.
I'll explain: I have one project which has really lots of dependencies and lots of SYSTEM classes are starting from a lower case (not like Java convention). They are named in a such way, because they are low-level or working with some hardware or just not intended to work with them.
(see attchments).
Comment 3 Yauheniy Ratkevich CLA 2016-07-01 14:18:41 EDT 
Created attachment 262863 [details]
Example
Comment 4 Yauheniy Ratkevich CLA 2016-07-01 14:19:00 EDT 
Created attachment 262864 [details]
Example2
Comment 5 Jay Arthanareeswaran CLA 2016-07-04 04:02:38 EDT 
You have probably thought about this, if not you should explore other ways of filtering those out, perhaps they all come from particular packages so they can 'not' be proposed? Just thinking aloud.
Comment 6 Yauheniy Ratkevich CLA 2016-07-04 04:32:17 EDT 
(In reply to Jay Arthanareeswaran from comment #5)
> You have probably thought about this, if not you should explore other ways
> of filtering those out, perhaps they all come from particular packages so
> they can 'not' be proposed? Just thinking aloud.

There are many packages that contains such classes. Of course I may filter such classes just by adding filter: [a-z]*
But it's just my small proposal...
Comment 7 Yauheniy Ratkevich CLA 2016-07-04 04:33:15 EDT 
(In reply to Yauheniy Ratkevich from comment #6)
> (In reply to Jay Arthanareeswaran from comment #5)
> > You have probably thought about this, if not you should explore other ways
> > of filtering those out, perhaps they all come from particular packages so
> > they can 'not' be proposed? Just thinking aloud.
> 
> There are many packages that contains such classes. Of course I may filter
> such classes just by adding filter: [a-z]*
> But it's just my small proposal...

Here I should add 26 (a-z) filters, because Type Filter field doesn't support regexp value.