Community
Participate
Working Groups
RC1 - browsing perspective (probably does not matter) - smoke test scenario - two editors open side by side - open IMoney.java and Money.java - enable Mark Occurrences, 'sticky' preference does *not* matter - select a textual instance of IMoney in money -> all IMoney instances in Money.java are highlighted -> there is highlighting in IMoney.java as well, if the caret is placed on a highlightable element expected: there is only highlighting in the active editor - Ensure that the caret in both editors is on a highlightable element, such that there is highlighting if the editor is active - switch between the editors using Ctrl+F6 -> ok: there is only highlighting in the active editor - switch between the editors using the mouse -> not ok: there is highlighting in both editors.
*** Bug 107464 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 178289 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
The right way to solve this is to add the occurence annotation to the visual annotation model and change the AnnotationPainter to work on the visual annotation model. This is quite a change and will probably add performance degradation as the visual annotation model delegates to the model's annotation model. Such a change needs closer investigation and testing.
*** Bug 220835 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 284978 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 337960 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet. If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant. -- The automated Eclipse Genie.
*** Bug 548182 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
(In reply to Dani Megert from comment #3) > This is quite a change and will probably add performance degradation I'm sure 15 years later the computers caught up with those computing demands.
