Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [cdt-dev] Heads-up: A new renaming UI tool

I don’t think that this functionality should be added to CDT at this time.  I’ll explain why, but first, let me digress…


This is simply my opinion and you can attach whatever weight that you want to it.  I’m not trying to upset anyone, but I AM trying to change the priorities of the team.


I think that CDT currently has enough “code-assist” functionality.  Sure, more is better, but adding more need not be a priority.


In my personal opinion, there are 3 important issues with CDT that would keep me from recommending that Intel C++ customers use it (This is not to suggest that I ultimately make that decision…). 


  1. Lack of complete functionality in the build system:  This has been discussed a lot, and I think that this will be the easiest problem to fix.  I’m not criticizing the idea, the design, or the current implementation.  It’s simply that not enough resources have been applied to it.
  2. No support for different vendor C/C++ language variants:  My concern, directly related to Hoda’s proposal, is that when parsing fails, all of the “code-assist” functionality may be broken.  Hoda, how certain are you that there are not cases where your renaming functionality will do the wrong thing (without the user being aware that it has done the wrong thing) when parsing/searching fails?
  3. Scalability with large projects with respect to code-assist functionality.  I saw a few mails from Thomas Fletcher in February that suggest to me that there are serious problems.  After my own review of the CDT design last Fall, I have always been concerned that there is too much parsing and other reading of source files (e.g. indexing) going on.


Numbers 2 and 3 look like hard problems and need to be solved together.


In summary, with respect to Hoda’s proposal, I don’t think that new “seed”s for additional code-assist functionality should be added when the foundation to support it is not solid.



Leo Treggiari

Intel Corp.


-----Original Message-----
From: cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Hoda Amer
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 10:12 AM
To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [cdt-dev] Heads-up: A new renaming UI tool


Hello everyone,

I have been working on a new UI tool for renaming model elements. It relies on search in finding all occurrences of a specific model element and changes the found occurrences in the code to a new name. It could be invoked by a menu item in the C/C++ Packages view.

I have used the basic architecture of the JDT refactoring, but simplified it to a great extent. In JDT, refactoring has many specific options depending on the renamed element. It also has an undo manager and a sophisticated preview page. Further, JDT has defined refactoring as an extension point such that participants could change its behavior if they wish.

The new tool does not have all of this. It just has a simple preview where the user can choose to apply changes to a whole file or skip that specific file. It totally depends on search, so its correctness is fairly high. It is not too sophisticated and it does not have an undo manager; however, it can be viewed as a seed that could be added to later to develop a solid refactoring tool.

I am still testing the tool, but I am planning to submit it soon. I am interested to know what everyone thinks about this.

Hoda Amer
Staff Software Engineer
Rational Software - IBM Software Group

Back to the top