Difference between revisions of "Code::Completion Rewrite"
Stevenkaras (talk | contribs) |
Stevenkaras (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
** Provide automatic code generation features | ** Provide automatic code generation features | ||
− | === | + | === Code::Completion === |
− | ==== | + | ==== Purpose Statement ==== |
The current Code::Completion plugin is outdated, and needs a complete rewrite. | The current Code::Completion plugin is outdated, and needs a complete rewrite. | ||
The purpose of the Code::Completion plugin is thus: | The purpose of the Code::Completion plugin is thus: | ||
Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
* Provide completion features for initializer lists | * Provide completion features for initializer lists | ||
− | === Process === | + | ==== Process ==== |
− | + | # Generate a list of all valid symbols in the current scope | |
− | + | ## Take global list from C::SymbolTable | |
+ | ## Add in local scope parsed on the fly | ||
+ | # Reduce that list to what is likely | ||
+ | # Show that list to the user in some fashion | ||
+ | # Insert the proper solution on user request | ||
+ | === Code::SymbolTable === | ||
There will be 3 symbol lists: | There will be 3 symbol lists: | ||
# global namespace | # global namespace | ||
Line 185: | Line 190: | ||
* Such representation would require some extra "hidden" symbols - for example when some complex type is returned from function, extra symbol of typedef representing proper value would be required. | * Such representation would require some extra "hidden" symbols - for example when some complex type is returned from function, extra symbol of typedef representing proper value would be required. | ||
* Also in case of templates, typeid's should be threated in special way - negative value could mean to use template argument instead of some real type. Base types (the POD ones) should have some predefined type ids. | * Also in case of templates, typeid's should be threated in special way - negative value could mean to use template argument instead of some real type. Base types (the POD ones) should have some predefined type ids. | ||
− | |||
Questions: | Questions: | ||
* why are we storing filepos_end? Wouldn't it be much more useful to store declaration, definition info? | * why are we storing filepos_end? Wouldn't it be much more useful to store declaration, definition info? | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
== More complex cases of C::C usage == | == More complex cases of C::C usage == |
Revision as of 16:09, 11 March 2008
Background
The current Code::Completion plug-in has some flaws, and is currently development frozen. The current plug-in lacks full support for:
- function and class templates
- default arguments in some cases
- some of the more complicated c++ mucky business
Current Effort
Structure
The current C::C is a monolithic library of features, which could be de-coupled and split up for use in multiple plugins, providing extra functionality and flexibility in the future. Therefore, I propose the C::C be broken up into the following components:
- Code::SymbolTable
- Provide a list of valid symbols in the workspace, along with relevant scope information
- Code::Completion
- Provide Auto-complete features
- Code::SymbolOutline
- Provide Symbol browser, find symbol, function jump features
- Code::Refactoring
- Provide code refactoring features
- Code::Documentation
- Provide automatic code generation features
Code::Completion
Purpose Statement
The current Code::Completion plugin is outdated, and needs a complete rewrite. The purpose of the Code::Completion plugin is thus:
- Provide a list of likely symbols in the current scope as possible solutions to the current symbol.
- Provide function tooltips
- Parameter list
- Relevant documentation
- Provide completion features for class constructors
- Provide completion features for initializer lists
Process
- Generate a list of all valid symbols in the current scope
- Take global list from C::SymbolTable
- Add in local scope parsed on the fly
- Reduce that list to what is likely
- Show that list to the user in some fashion
- Insert the proper solution on user request
Code::SymbolTable
There will be 3 symbol lists:
- global namespace
- local scope
- class scope
Here's the current data proposal:
class symbol { string name; // name of the symbol int id; // Id of the symbol, should be unique in the workspace int file_id; // Id of file where the symbol has been declared int filepos_begin; // Position where declaration of the symbol starts int filepos_end; // Position where declaration of the symbol ends int type; // Type of the symbol: macro / class / typedef / variable / function flags modifiers; // Bitfield used to mark some estra properties of symbol // like that it is static or inline int value_type_id; // Id of symbol which represents c++ type of current symbol // (like type of variable or type of returned value from function) int extra_type_id; // Extra type used in some cases list children; // List of child elements of this symbol (members in class etc) list extra_lists[3]; // See table below map extra_values; // int -> string map which can keep some extra data }
class list_entry { int symbol_id; // ID of the symbol referenced int storage_class; // Storage class of the symbol (private/protected/public) }
Explanation of symbol::extra_lists[]
type | modifiers | value_type_id | extra_type | children | extra_lists[0] | extra_lists[1] | extra_lists[2] |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
namespace | declarations in namespace | "using" namespaces | |||||
class / struct / union | members of class | base classes | template args | friends of class | |||
variable | extern, static, volatile, const | type of variable | |||||
function | static, inline, const ... | returned value | arguments | template arguments | |||
typedef | pointer, array, reference, pointer_to_member | base type | type of class in pointer_to_member | ||||
enum | items in enum | ||||||
enum item | id of enum | ||||||
macro | macro parts | ||||||
macro part | arg_to_string, va_args | number of arg or -1 |
Comments:
- Such representation would require some extra "hidden" symbols - for example when some complex type is returned from function, extra symbol of typedef representing proper value would be required.
- Also in case of templates, typeid's should be threated in special way - negative value could mean to use template argument instead of some real type. Base types (the POD ones) should have some predefined type ids.
Questions:
- why are we storing filepos_end? Wouldn't it be much more useful to store declaration, definition info?
More complex cases of C::C usage
Here we can put some more complex examples of c++ code where C::C may fail. Symbols that may be hard to find should be marked in bold
1: Fetching type of operator call
#include <string> using namespace std; int main(int,char**) { ( string("first") + "second" + "third" ) . c_str(); return 0; }
2: Template classes
template<typename T> class Template { public: T& GetInstance() { return m_Instance; } private: T m_Instance; }; class Parameter { public: void PrintfText() { printf("Text"); } }; int main(int,char**) { Template<Parameter> Object; Object.GetInstance().PrintfText(); }