Can I use Eclipse templates to insert methods and also call them? - eclipse

I'm doing some competitions on a website called topcoder.com where the objective is to solve algorithmic problems. I'm using Eclipse for this purpose, and I code in Java, it would be help me to have some predefined templates or macros that I can use for common coding tasks. For example I would like to write methods to be able to find the max value in and int[] array, or the longest sequence in an int[] array, and so on (there should be quite many of these). Note I can't write these methods as libraries because as part of the competition I need to submit everything in one file.
Therefore ideally, I would like to have some shortcut available to generate code both as a method and as a calling statement at once. Any ideas if this is possible?

Sure you can - I think that's a nifty way to auto-insert boilerplate or helper code. To the point of commenters, you probably want to group the code as a helper class, but the general idea sounds good to me:
You can see it listed in your available templates:
Then as you code your solution, you can Control+Space, type the first few characters of the name you gave your template, and you can preview it:
And then you can insert it. Be sure if you use a class structure to position it as an inner class:
Lastly - if you want to have a template inserts a call to method from a template, I think you would just use two templates. One like shown above (to print the helper code) and another that might look like this, which calls a util method and drops the cursor after it (or between the parentheses if you'd like, etc):
MyUtils.myUtilMethod1();${cursor}

Related

Is it possible to get the type of a variable while computing completion suggestions?

I'm thinking of creating a VSCode extension to help people use a library I am creating. I've looked in 50 places and can only see documentation on getting the plain text of the document in which the completion suggestions are triggered.
My library exposes a function with two parameters, both objects with the same keys, but the first one will be defined already and the 2nd one will be passed in as an object literal. For example
const obj1 = {a:1, b:2};
doLibraryThing(obj1, {a:[], b:[]});
I want to provide code completion, or a snippet, or anything that can detect that doLibraryThing is being called, and know what properties were defined in obj1, even though usually it will be imported from another file; and then use those properties to generate the suggestion with the same properties, {a:[], b:[]}.
Is this possible?

Documentation of OCaml code in Eclipse

I'm using Eclipse with the OcaIDE-Plugin to write my ocaml-project.
I have written several ocaml-functions that I want to document (comment, return values and params).
I've created my documentation in the .ml-files like described in this link: http://caml.inria.fr/pub/docs/manual-ocaml/ocamldoc.html
Here is an example of one function:
(** sorting tuples where first element is key *)
let my_comp x y = (*Some code*)
Unfortunately, my comments don't show up, when I press F2 at one of the functions, it only shows the name and the file it is contained.
When writing comments in an mli-file, it works as expected, but i also want to document "private" functions that are not accessible from the outside. Can I define functions in the mli, that are NOT accessible from the outside, just for the documentation?
How can I make Eclipse to show my documention?
Well, as you said, you would like to show the documentation but not export the function out of the module. That, sadly, won't work.
I guess OcaIDE can be considered as incomplete but it doesn't look like it's something people care about (I don't know a single person working on OcaIDE). If you like having autocompletion etc, maybe try to program with emacs and install merlin (look, I found the perfect post for you : here)
As for the suggestion of defining a function in the mli not accessible from the outside, it's completely opposed to why mli files are created, so don't expect that to be possible. ;-)
I hoped I've been able to help you.

Adding 'reference tables' to Doxygen

In my C++ application I have about 10 different classes that define certain 'behaviors' (let's call them A, B, C, ...). Other places (methods) in the code might use these behaviors in any combination. E.g. method M1 uses behaviors A and B, method M2 uses behaviors A, C and D, ...
In practice the code is similar like this:
BehaviorCollection coll;
BehaviorA ba;
coll.push_back(&ba);
BehaviorB bb;
coll.push_back(&bb);
someComplexFunctionality (coll);
I want to generate a clear overview of which method uses a behavior, preferably in the documentation of the specific behavior, so that the class documentation of every behavior contains a list like:
BehaviorA is used by the following methods:
- method1
- method3
- method7
I could hard-code this list but after a while it will become outdated because new methods are added, methods starts to use additional behaviors, or methods stop using behaviors.
So, to make this maintainable, I prefer to have something in the method using the behaviors, telling Doxygen "this code is using these behaviors, so add something in the documentation of that behavior".
Tools like "Visual AssistX" or "Understand for C/C++" allow me to perform the lookup but they still require some manual actions every time you want to do the lookup. Therefore I want to automate this in my documentation generation system.
I am considering using defgroup and ingroup, but I'm not sure this will work for code fragments.
What is the best approach to use?
I found a solution by using the xrefitem tag.
In every method using a behavior I added a line like this:
//! \xrefitem group_behaviorA_users "Behavior A users" "Behavior A Users"
And then the behavior itself contains a documentation line like this:
See \ref group_behaviorA_users for an overview of all users of this behavior.
Problem solved.

i18n in Symfony Forms

Is there any way I can use the format_number_choice function inside of a actions file. In fact I need to use it for a Form error message.
'max_size' => 'File is too large (maximum is %max_size% bytes).',
In English it's simply "bytes", but in other languages the syntax changes after a certain value (for example if the number is greater than 20 it's: "20 of bytes").
I can use parenthesis, of course, but if the framework offers support for doing this specific thing, why not to use it?!
The way it's currently implemented in the 1.4 branch, you can define only one translation per message using il18n XML files.
What you could do is create a custom validator which inherits the current validator (sfValidatorFile in your example) and does the size checking in the doClean method before calling its parent's method.
I suggest you take a look at the source to see how it works : sfValidatorFile
The correct way to handle number ranges for translation is explained here in the Definitive Guide. I won't reproduce it here as the documentation itself is clear and concise. Note however that the string is not extracted automatically by the i18n-extract task, so you need to add it manually - again, the documentation explains this.
So yes, you can use the format_number_choice() function inside an action - you just need to load the helper inside the action like this:
sfContext::getInstance()->getConfiguration()->loadHelpers('I18N');

Using table-of-contents in code?

Do you use table-of-contents for listing all the functions (and maybe variables) of a class in the beginning of big source code file? I know that alternative to that kind of listing would be to split up big files into smaller classes/files, so that their class declaration would be self-explanatory enough.. but some complex tasks require a lot of code. I'm not sure is it really worth it spending your time subdividing implementation into multiple of files? Or is it ok to create an index-listing additionally to the class/interface declaration?
EDIT:
To better illustrate how I use table-of-contents this is an example from my hobby project. It's actually not listing functions, but code blocks inside a function.. but you can probably get the idea anyway..
/*
CONTENTS
Order_mouse_from_to_points
Lines_intersecting_with_upper_point
Lines_intersecting_with_both_points
Lines_not_intersecting
Lines_intersecting_bottom_points
Update_intersection_range_indices
Rough_method
Normal_method
First_selected_item
Last_selected_item
Other_selected_item
*/
void SelectionManager::FindSelection()
{
// Order_mouse_from_to_points
...
// Lines_intersecting_with_upper_point
...
// Lines_intersecting_with_both_points
...
// Lines_not_intersecting
...
// Lines_intersecting_bottom_points
...
// Update_intersection_range_indices
for(...)
{
// Rough_method
....
// Normal_method
if(...)
{
// First_selected_item
...
// Last_selected_item
...
// Other_selected_item
...
}
}
}
Notice that index-items don't have spaces. Because of this I can click on one them and press F4 to jump to the item-usage, and F2 to jump back (simple visual studio find-next/prevous-shortcuts).
EDIT:
Another alternative solution to this indexing is using collapsed c# regions. You can configure visual studio to show only region names and hide all the code. Of course keyboard support for that source code navigation is pretty cumbersome...
I know that alternative to that kind of listing would be to split up big files into smaller classes/files, so that their class declaration would be self-explanatory enough.
Correct.
but some complex tasks require a lot of code
Incorrect. While a "lot" of code be required, long runs of code (over 25 lines) are a really bad idea.
actually not listing functions, but code blocks inside a function
Worse. A function that needs a table of contents must be decomposed into smaller functions.
I'm not sure is it really worth it spending your time subdividing implementation into multiple of files?
It is absolutely mandatory that you split things into smaller files. The folks that maintain, adapt and reuse your code need all the help they can get.
is it ok to create an index-listing additionally to the class/interface declaration?
No.
If you have to resort to this kind of trick, it's too big.
Also, many languages have tools to generate API docs from the code. Java, Python, C, C++ have documentation tools. Even with Javadoc, epydoc or Doxygen you still have to design things so that they are broken into intellectually manageable pieces.
Make things simpler.
Use a tool to create an index.
If you create a big index you'll have to maintain it as you change your code. Most modern IDEs create list of class members anyway. it seems like a waste of time to create such index.
I would never ever do this sort of busy-work in my code. The most I would do manually is insert a few lines at the top of the file/class explaining what this module did and how it is intended to be used.
If a list of methods and their interfaces would be useful, I generate them automatically, through a tool such as Doxygen.
I've done things like this. Not whole tables of contents, but a similar principle -- just ad-hoc links between comments and the exact piece of code in question. Also to link pieces of code that make the same simplifying assumptions that I suspect may need fixing up later.
You can use Visual Studio's task list to get a listing of certain types of comment. The format of the comments can be configured in Tools|Options, Environment\Task List. This isn't something I ended up using myself but it looks like it might help with navigating the code if you use this system a lot.
If you can split your method like that, you should probably write more methods. After this is done, you can use an IDE to give you the static call stack from the initial method.
EDIT: You can use Eclipse's 'Show Call Hierarchy' feature while programming.