Is there a way without typing /** that I can generate comment template for the entire class? I have 50 methods in the class and it gets tedious to type /** for each and every method and specifying the params.
JAutodoc can do this: http://jautodoc.sourceforge.net/
Related
We need to change every <anything>/show routes to something localized.
How can we customize the show string in something like dettagli ?
You can do in two way:
By creating a custom operation, starting from the default Show operation. Copy-paste the code of the ShowOperation.php in your project, and change the route. Then throughout your project use your ShowOperation, instead of the one provided by Backpack.
By overriding the protected function setupShowRoutes($segment, $routeName, $controller) in your CrudController. If you have that method in your ProductCrudController for example, your method will be run instead of the one in the ShowOperation trait. However, this needs to be done in all CrudControllers individually, so it's less DRY.
My question is very simple. How can you create your own tooltip information for your own created methods and classes, the way all methods and classes of the standard library of java have, when you are writing code and choosing methods and subclasses?!
For example, let's say I have a Class A, in which I have a Method B. Now I define a new instance of Class A in another Class C by writing "A my_class = new A()". Now when I write "my_class.B" I want the Eclipse to show me the information about the Method B in a tooltip, so I know what are the parameters I have to pass to that method B.
Here is a picture example:
http://www.subshell.com/en/subshell/blog/eclipse-javadoc-tooltips100~v-full_small.jpg
I searched a while, but I didn't find any solutions for that. So maybe you know how to do that!
In eclipse, once you add the javadoc comment to your method, it will show up wherever you refer to that method. The Javadoc comment takes the form
/**
* This is my method description
* #param x the total number of mangoes allowed
* #return int the number of litres of juice possible
*/
Javadoc comments are placed just before the artifact that it describes. So a method comment will go on the line before the method, a class comment goes on the line before the class statement and so on.
Currently I have big difficulties extending Zend_Form.
I have the basic class called Forms_LpaManageEmailForm.
It is used separately and works fine.
Next I've created a new class form
called Default_Form_CartReport witch extends Forms_LpaManageEmailForm.
So the task is to render Default_Form_CartReport and slitely modificate it.
In other words I need all functionality of
Forms_LpaManageEmailForm class but with overriden _addMultiOptionsForMultiSelect() function
(what is done) and changed button label (doesn't solved).
In basic class I have hidden element named id which value is filled with
$this->_entry_id['entry_id']. When I use basic form separately - its woks fine. But
when I run extended form(Forms_LpaManageEmailForm) I see that hidden id element's value is empty. In basic class in construct section I run
Zend debugger(with this line Zend_Debug::dump($this->_entry_id['entry_id'])) to see if the
value is passed. And it's passed :) When I repeat this in init() section it shows NULL...
As I barely understand - the problem lays in init() functions, in the way it is called.
I think something is wrong with Default_Form_CartReport class skeleton.
I've uploaded code to: PASTEBIN
Really need help in this question.
Thank you!
I believe your issues are causing my the fact that Forms_LpaManageEmailForm:: __construct is calling $this->init() directly. if you open the Zend_Form, you will notice that the __construct is also calling the $this->init() function. This cause your init() function to executed twice.
Try to load all your logic & elements solely in the __construct function, and don't use the init() function. also, the __construct function in each form class should always call the parent::__construct before any additional logic.
I know it's possible to get IDE autocompletion from the *Table classes in Doctrine by doing things like this:
SomethingTable::getInstance()-><autocomplete>;
But the most important part is missing. I want autocomplete on the model classes themselves, not just the Table classes. It appears that Doctrine is not properly declaring the PHPdoc #return object types in the find and other standard model methods.
For example what I want to be able to do is this:
$something = SomethingTable::getInstance()->find($id);
$something-><autocomplete>
and have that pop up the methods and properties of the Something class.
I should mention too that I don't specifically care about using the SomethingTable::getInstance() syntax at all. ANY decent syntax that's standard Symfony is acceptable. Most of the time I'm fetching objects (or Doctrine_Collections) via custom queries like this:
$somethings = Doctrine_Query::create()
->from('Something s')
->leftJoin('s.SomethingElse s2')
->where(...);
By the way, in case it's not clear, I'm asking if there's any automatic solution to this with ANY of the various Doctrine find, fetch or query syntaxes. I'm NOT asking how to manually edit all the PHPdoc headers to cause the behavior I want.
I'm using NetBeans 6.9.1 and Symfony 1.4.12 with Doctrine, but not everyone working on the same code uses NetBeans.
The problem is that autogenerated *Table classes have the wrong phpdoc #return in the getInstance() method:
/**
* Returns an instance of this class.
*
* #return object MyModelTable
*/
public static function getInstance()
{
return Doctrine_Core::getTable('MyModel');
}
You just need to manually fix the #return line deleting the word "object":
* #return MyModelTable
And magically IDE autocompletion just works, giving you all the instance and static methods:
MyModelable::getInstance()->... //(you'll have autocompletion here)
I know, its a pain to have to manually fix this but at least it only have to be done once for each model *Table file.
In netbeans its quite easy:
$foo = ModelNameTable::getInstance()->find(1); /* #var $foo ModelName */
/* #var $foo ModelName */ tells netbeans to handle the variable $foo as a ModelName class.
just fix the generated model files by adding
/**
* #return ModelNameTable
*/
in the comment of the getInstance() method. This will provide autocomplete for the model file.
Regarding the find method, you can edit the comment of the class like this :
/**
* #method ModelName find()
*/
I think it might be possible for you to do this automatically by creating you own skeleton files.
Or not : Symfony Doctrine skeleton files
You could use sed to achieve this, or perhaps build your own task using the reflection api.
I'm working on Magento templates, but this issue would apply to any template loading system.
As these templates are loaded by the template engine there's no way for the IDE (in this case Aptana) to know what object type $this is.
Potentially it could more than one object as a single template could be loaded by multiple objects, but ignoring this, what would the correct phpdoc syntax be to specify a specific class for the $this object?
You can define it like this:
/* #var $this type */
where type is a class name
To be clear, using $this should only ever indicate an object of the current class, right?
PhpDocumentor doesn't currently (v1.4.3) recognize $this as a specific keyword that should equate to a datatype of the class itself.
Only datatypes known by PHP and classes already parsed by PhpDocumentor are the proper datatype values to use with the #return tag. There is a feature request in to have some option available in PhpDocumtentor to aid in documenting fluent methods that always "return $this". [1]
In the case of the #var tag, I don't see how it would be feasible for a class variable to contain its own class instance. As such, I can't follow what "#var $this" should be saying.
If, however, your intention with $this is not for fluent methods that "return $this", and was simply to be some shortcut to PhpDocumentor and/or your IDE to magically guess what datatypes you might mean by using $this, I'd have to guess there's no way to do it. The closest suggestion I could make would be to use the name of a parent class that is a common parent to all the various child classes that this particular var/return might be at runtime, and then use the description part of the tag to have inline {#link} tags that list out the possible child classes that are possible.
Example: I have a Parent abstract class with Child1, Child2, and Child3 children that each could occur in my runtime Foo class.
So, Foo::_var could be any of those child class types at runtime, but how would I document this?
/**
* #var Parent this could be any child of {#link Parent}, {#link Child1}, {#link Child2}, or {#link Child3}...
*/
protected $_var;
Getting back to the "return $this" issue, I'd document things in a similar way:
/**
* a fluent method (i.e. it returns this class's instance object)
* #return Parent this could be any child of {#link Parent}, {#link Child1}, {#link Child2}, or {#link Child3}...
*/
public function foo() {
return $this;
}
Documenting this way at least allows your class doc to have links to the particular classes. What it fails to do is highlight the fluent 'ness. However, if your IDE is capable of recognizing the class names, then perhaps it will be able to do the necessary logical linking to those other classes. I think Eclipse is able to do this at least with popup help, if you hover over the class name in the tag's description. I do not think Eclipse can use this to then make the various child classes' methods available in code completion. It would know about the Parent methods for code completion, because the datatype I explicitly list is Parent, but that's as far as the IDE can go.
[1] -- http://pear.php.net/bugs/bug.php?id=16223
I have found that defining a type with #var for $this does not work - presumably because $this is special and is treated as such by Aptana. I have a similar need to the poster I think - it is in template files (in my case simply located and included by functions within the data class) that I wish to set a type for $this. As #ashnazg says, setting a type for $this within a class definition is not needed, because the type of $this is always the type of the class (up to inheritance).
There is, however, a workaround for template files. At the top of the template file simply put something like
/**
* #var My_Data_Model_Type
*/
$dataModel = &$this;
Then simply use $dataModel (or whatever you choose to call it - maybe something shorter) instead of $this in the template