Author Topic: 2 questions: open #include and automatic indention  (Read 4197 times)

Offline New++

  • Single posting newcomer
  • *
  • Posts: 2
2 questions: open #include and automatic indention
« on: December 02, 2005, 03:33:07 pm »
First things first: I just migrated from DevC++ and I have to say C::B really rocks.

But now to the questions:
1. The bug "[ 1338214 ] open include file does not always work" is closed, but the problem described still persists in my 1.0rc2. From the dates I would assume this fix should be part of 1.0rc2 already. Am I missing something here?

2. Is there a way to add automatic indention after the keywords public:, protected: and private:?

TIA

Offline mandrav

  • Project Leader
  • Administrator
  • Lives here!
  • *****
  • Posts: 4291
    • Code::Blocks IDE
Re: 2 questions: open #include and automatic indention
« Reply #1 on: December 02, 2005, 03:46:55 pm »
1. The bug "[ 1338214 ] open include file does not always work" is closed, but the problem described still persists in my 1.0rc2. From the dates I would assume this fix should be part of 1.0rc2 already. Am I missing something here?

That bug was about a specific missing search dir, IIRC.
Work has been done on this feature though (not yet in SVN) and is already improved...

2. Is there a way to add automatic indention after the keywords public:, protected: and private:?

No, there isn't...
Be patient!
This bug will be fixed soon...

Offline rickg22

  • Lives here!
  • ****
  • Posts: 2283
Re: 2 questions: open #include and automatic indention
« Reply #2 on: December 02, 2005, 04:10:09 pm »
Well, there's a workaround. Press TAB :lol:

Sorry, actually i'd have liked that feature, too, but so far nobody knows how to implement that.

Offline Urxae

  • Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 376
Re: 2 questions: open #include and automatic indention
« Reply #3 on: December 02, 2005, 04:33:09 pm »
Well, there's a workaround. Press TAB :lol:

Sorry, actually i'd have liked that feature, too, but so far nobody knows how to implement that.

Well, how was it implemented for auto-indent after "{"? Or is that one of those wxScintilla features that just had to be turned on?

Offline mandrav

  • Project Leader
  • Administrator
  • Lives here!
  • *****
  • Posts: 4291
    • Code::Blocks IDE
Re: 2 questions: open #include and automatic indention
« Reply #4 on: December 02, 2005, 06:22:05 pm »
Well, there's a workaround. Press TAB :lol:

Sorry, actually i'd have liked that feature, too, but so far nobody knows how to implement that.

Well, how was it implemented for auto-indent after "{"? Or is that one of those wxScintilla features that just had to be turned on?

No, it's not a scintilla feature.
But checking for the last character is quite different than checking for the last word, performance-wise.
And I didn't say it's not possible. New++ asked if this feature is implemented, and I just said no...
Be patient!
This bug will be fixed soon...

Offline Urxae

  • Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 376
Re: 2 questions: open #include and automatic indention
« Reply #5 on: December 02, 2005, 07:05:52 pm »
Well, there's a workaround. Press TAB :lol:

Sorry, actually i'd have liked that feature, too, but so far nobody knows how to implement that.

Well, how was it implemented for auto-indent after "{"? Or is that one of those wxScintilla features that just had to be turned on?

No, it's not a scintilla feature.
But checking for the last character is quite different than checking for the last word, performance-wise.
And I didn't say it's not possible. New++ asked if this feature is implemented, and I just said no...

Yes, you said it wasn't implemented. But, as quoted above, Rick said "so far nobody knows how to implement that". Which was what I was responding to...

Offline New++

  • Single posting newcomer
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: 2 questions: open #include and automatic indention
« Reply #6 on: December 04, 2005, 05:41:06 pm »
Well, speaking of performance: You would only have to check the last word if the last character check was a ':', and that wouldn't be so often, would it? But then I have no idea what that would really mean in terms of performance impact.