Re: [anjuta-devel] Aggressivity of merging

[Johannes Schmid <jhs jsschmid de>]

Hi Moritz!


> Today I tried to merge the calltip code in language-support-vala with 
> the new parser-engine plugin. Each corresponding method do this in a 
> different way. (see 
> https://github.com/ritze/anjuta-clang/commit/814f11c887e63f0a4b9c71eff17649afd8b99e58#L2R401 
> "plugins/language-support-vala/provider.vala" and 
> "plugins/parser-engine/plugin.c")

Cool, will have a look at this during the week. Also thanks for your
blog post with the nice schema.

> For example the vala plugin only displays the parameters of the method 
> without the name of the method and parser-engine plugin, which is used 
> in the cpp-java plugin, also shows the name of the method.
>
> Additionally I couldn't find out, if the parser-engine plugin will be 
> ever append a "..." string for a parameter with variable number of 
> arguments (like args in the main method).
>
> My ask is how aggressive should I merge the code? Should each 
> language-support plugin show the calltips in the same way or in its own 
> way?

The different plugins should definitly behave the same and be
transparent to the user. I didn't notice that the vala plugins doesn't
show the method name but I feel it is good to have the full signature of
the method (including the name) in the tooltip. All modern computers
should have enough screen-space for this.

> Another point is the cache part, which each language-support plugin 
> does it in a different way too.

If we can have a common cache part that would be best. But I am not sure
if the different mechanism can efficiently use the same cache part. In
general I would prefer one working and tested cache part.

> The good news is that I've already merge the obviously code. By the way 
> I saw, that the git plugin has very much code duplication.

Can you give some details here?

Thanks,
Johannes