Bug 68586 - [implementation] Reconciling should be more robust
Summary: [implementation] Reconciling should be more robust
Status: VERIFIED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: JDT
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: Text (show other bugs)
Version: 3.0   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P2 critical with 1 vote (vote)
Target Milestone: 3.1 M5   Edit
Assignee: JDT-Text-Inbox CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
: 69911 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2004-06-25 06:37 EDT by Philipe Mulet CLA
Modified: 2005-02-18 06:19 EST (History)
3 users (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 Philipe Mulet CLA 2004-06-25 06:37:22 EDT 
Cheetah as of 20040625

In situations where the compiler/reconcile has bugs like in early Cheetah, 
editor contents cannot be saved properly, also see bug 68557 for an example.

We should make our support more robust, and capture such failures as 
JavaModelExceptions (similar to batch compiler handling).
Comment 1 Jerome Lanneluc CLA 2004-06-25 06:56:26 EDT 
We already report such failure as a JavaModelException. It is the 
CompilationUnitDocumentProvider that is not robust enough and that lets this 
exception go through without saving the working copy. This causes data loss.

Moving to JDT UI for comment.
Comment 2 Philipe Mulet CLA 2004-06-25 07:09:50 EDT 
This is pretty important to address, especially in the context of Cheetah 
where some unstability is expected in short term.
Comment 3 Igor Fedorenko CLA 2004-06-27 16:37:33 EDT 
I can not agree more. Java editor should provide basic editing functionality
like save or copy&paste regardless of reconciliation. See also bug 67369.
Comment 4 Dani Megert CLA 2004-07-13 09:45:50 EDT 
*** Bug 69911 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 5 Dani Megert CLA 2004-09-08 10:23:42 EDT 
See also bug 40357.
Comment 6 Dani Megert CLA 2005-01-11 10:47:14 EST 
Fixed in HEAD.
Available in builds > 20050111
Comment 7 Dani Megert CLA 2005-02-18 06:19:55 EST 
Verified in I20050217-2000 by throwing an artificial JME in JDT Core and
checking that the CU contents got correctly saved anyway.