Re: Why code completion and early error checking are needed

From: Steven T. Hatton (susudata_at_setidava.kushan.aa)
Date: 06/05/04 

Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 11:17:05 -0400

Petec wrote:

> Steven T. Hatton wrote:

>> Since I still believe the features I listed are important to C++ I am
>> making an effort to return that discussion to the relevant technical
>> matters. The list is not intended to be exhaustive, and any item on
>> it is subject to refinement or even removal. It is only intended as
>> a starting point for further development of the ideas. Here is the
>> list again:
>> //-----------------------------------------------------------
>> Will the IDE add the required headers and using declarations to your
>> source automatically?
>>
>> Will it give an indication of the exceptions thrown by a function
>> call?
>>
>> Will it display all the overloaded function signture with an
>> indication of the type of parameter it takes?
>>
>> Does it filter according to context? That is, does it only show the
>> identifiers visible in the current scope when it provides code
>> completion (unless you ask for more)?
>>
>> When it shows error indicators in the edit buffer, is that a result of
>> compiler output, or is the code evaluated as you input it?
>>
>> Can you add virtually any SDK such as the Xerces C++ to the available
>> resources and have the code completion and checking work at the same
>> level as it does for the Standard Libraray and the implementation's
>> API(s)? //-----------------------------------------------------------

>
> Again, C++ already provides such functionality in its declarations.

I don't believe the Standard acutally requires the presence of these
declarations as such. As long as the implementation producese the compiled
result "as if" they were present it is considered to conform to the
Standard.

> It's
> up to the IDEs to use that info, and the /language/ standards should not
> specify IDE features.

It's been proposed that IDE support be included as a formal consideration in
future versions of the Standard. The way I see it, the traditional view of
source code written in programming languages is that it has two primary
audiences, programmers, and computers. I believe a third 'audience' should
be considered, the IDE. I am not proposing the specification of the
language place requierments on IDEs. It does seem reasonable to consider
placing requirements on the implementation to provide a standard means of
extracting information from the available resources intended for use as
development libraries. That includes the Standard Library.

It may turn out that the Standard itself does not need to be modified, and
that this can all be accomplished by the implementation. 

-- 
STH 
Hatton's Law: "There is only One inviolable Law"
KDevelop: http://www.kdevelop.org  SuSE: http://www.suse.com
Mozilla: http://www.mozilla.org

Relevant Pages
Loading