Home » Modeling » EMF "Technology" (Ecore Tools, EMFatic, etc) » MWE JavaBeautifier differs from oAW Version(?)
| MWE JavaBeautifier differs from oAW Version(?) [message #372499] |
Wed, 29 July 2009 05:26  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
While migrating from oaw4 to mwe, I came across a change in the behaviour
of the org.eclipse.xpand2.output.JavaBeautifier class.
In order to be flexible within my different projects that all use the same
workflow, I am using some parameters to specify different options.
One of the parameters is the configuration file that has to be used by the
JavaBeautifier.
In oaw4, I achieved, that the default formatting behaviour should be used
by simply specifying an empty string as configuration file for the
postprocessor.
In mwe, I would have to skip the entire attribute "configFile".
If I pass an empty string (or an invalid file name) to that attribute,
error messages occur and no formatting is done at all.
Viewing the source of JavaBeautifier, I see that the default values are
only set, if
* either the attribute is skipped
* or the file is empty
If the filename is en empty string or simply invalid, the class displays
error messages that the java files contain invalid java code.
In my opinion, the "invalid configuration file" behaviour should be
identical to the "no configuration file at all" behaviour.
I just want to ask, if this change in behaviour is intended or not.
(I for myself would prefer to have back the "old" one. ;-))
My "workaround" currently is, that I created a completely empty file I'm
using as reference each time I want the default behaviour.
|
|
|
| Re: MWE JavaBeautifier differs from oAW Version(?) [message #468259 is a reply to message #372499] |
Tue, 04 August 2009 14:08  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi Ludwig,
it seems that this is a "migration-bug".
It's related to Xpand.
Could you please file a bug report?
Thanks,
Sven
Ludwig Straub schrieb:
> While migrating from oaw4 to mwe, I came across a change in the
> behaviour of the org.eclipse.xpand2.output.JavaBeautifier class.
>
> In order to be flexible within my different projects that all use the
> same workflow, I am using some parameters to specify different options.
>
> One of the parameters is the configuration file that has to be used by
> the JavaBeautifier.
>
> In oaw4, I achieved, that the default formatting behaviour should be
> used by simply specifying an empty string as configuration file for the
> postprocessor.
> In mwe, I would have to skip the entire attribute "configFile".
> If I pass an empty string (or an invalid file name) to that attribute,
> error messages occur and no formatting is done at all.
>
> Viewing the source of JavaBeautifier, I see that the default values are
> only set, if
> * either the attribute is skipped
> * or the file is empty
>
> If the filename is en empty string or simply invalid, the class displays
> error messages that the java files contain invalid java code.
>
> In my opinion, the "invalid configuration file" behaviour should be
> identical to the "no configuration file at all" behaviour.
>
> I just want to ask, if this change in behaviour is intended or not.
> (I for myself would prefer to have back the "old" one. ;-))
>
> My "workaround" currently is, that I created a completely empty file I'm
> using as reference each time I want the default behaviour.
>
--
Need professional support for Eclipse Modeling?
Go visit: http://xtext.itemis.com
|
|
|
| Re: MWE JavaBeautifier differs from oAW Version(?) [message #621299 is a reply to message #372499] |
Tue, 04 August 2009 14:08 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi Ludwig,
it seems that this is a "migration-bug".
It's related to Xpand.
Could you please file a bug report?
Thanks,
Sven
Ludwig Straub schrieb:
> While migrating from oaw4 to mwe, I came across a change in the
> behaviour of the org.eclipse.xpand2.output.JavaBeautifier class.
>
> In order to be flexible within my different projects that all use the
> same workflow, I am using some parameters to specify different options.
>
> One of the parameters is the configuration file that has to be used by
> the JavaBeautifier.
>
> In oaw4, I achieved, that the default formatting behaviour should be
> used by simply specifying an empty string as configuration file for the
> postprocessor.
> In mwe, I would have to skip the entire attribute "configFile".
> If I pass an empty string (or an invalid file name) to that attribute,
> error messages occur and no formatting is done at all.
>
> Viewing the source of JavaBeautifier, I see that the default values are
> only set, if
> * either the attribute is skipped
> * or the file is empty
>
> If the filename is en empty string or simply invalid, the class displays
> error messages that the java files contain invalid java code.
>
> In my opinion, the "invalid configuration file" behaviour should be
> identical to the "no configuration file at all" behaviour.
>
> I just want to ask, if this change in behaviour is intended or not.
> (I for myself would prefer to have back the "old" one. ;-))
>
> My "workaround" currently is, that I created a completely empty file I'm
> using as reference each time I want the default behaviour.
>
--
Need professional support for Eclipse Modeling?
Go visit: http://xtext.itemis.com
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Wed Jul 02 06:18:26 EDT 2025
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 1.08153 seconds |
Home