A feature I want to implement

[oBFusCATed]

Hello,

I have an idea for a new feature, but I don't know where to start/what to modify, can you help me?

Here is the idea:
When I type a very long function definition/declaration/call, I hit enter to make the line shorter an more readable.
The current behavior on this action is to send the cursor at the beginning of the next line + 1 tab (I think).
I want to make it to go to the first opening bracket '(', so I can type:

Code

void mylongfunc(int param1, 'hit enter here and directly go to the bracket and type the second param'
                int param2, ' ... and so on so forth'

The MS VC has that feature for function definitions, I want to expand it to definitions and callings.

Where do I need to hack  :lol:  ?

Best regards,
Teodor

[dmoore]

open codeblocks.cbp
ctrl-shift-f, search the project for SMART INDENTING

I would think that you won't need to hand parse the text. You should be able to use the lexing info in scintilla to find the position of the opening brace.

[ollydbg]

You can look into this thread for a reference:

http://forums.codeblocks.org/index.php/topic,10361.0.html

[oBFusCATed]

Thank you,
I'll take a look at it, tonight.

Yesterday, I've done some experimenting and I have the basic feature working.
I need to polish it and add some improvements.
Then I'll show it, so more testing can be done.

[oBFusCATed]

Here is the patch,
It only one major problem:

Code

a = 5 + my_func(long_arg1, long_arg2, --> hit enter it works
                       long_arg3, long_arg4); --> hit enter and the cursor goes to
                       | --> here :(

a = 5 + my_func(long_arg1, long_arg2); --> here it works
| --> cursor is here after enter is hit

Is there a way to get the indent level of the previous statement or something similar.
It can stay that way, it is not mega annoying, but I prefer to make it better?

Feedback is welcome

p.p. Patch is attached to the post



[attachment deleted by admin]

[ollydbg]

Code

a = 5 + my_func(long_arg1, long_arg2, --> hit First enter it works 
                       long_arg3, long_arg4); --> hit Second enter and the cursor goes to
                       | --> here :(

Great!
I'm not quite understand your idea.
Where should the cursor be after the second enter?

It should be like this below?:

Code

a = 5 + my_func(long_arg1, long_arg2, --> hit First enter it works 
                       long_arg3, long_arg4); --> hit Second enter and the cursor goes to
| --> here :(

Thanks.

[oBFusCATed]

Yes, it should go to the position of "a".

[dmoore]

but won't your patch do this?

Code

cout<<"(";<-- press enter
        |<-- cursor position

also, why not indent for other types of braces

slightly off-topic, but one reason I despise this feature is that it encourages coders to do this:

Code

void my_func(
                  int arg1, // random gibberish comment
                  char *arg2,
                  myclass arg3, // random gibberish comment
                  )

instead of

Code

// comment
void my_func(int arg1, char *arg2, myclass arg3);

even worse when they then do similar crap with the call, reducing the number of effective loc that I can fit on screen without really enhancing readability of the code.

[oBFusCATed]

but won't your patch do this?

Code

cout<<"(";<-- press enter
        |<-- cursor position

no, but

Code

cout << "(" <<

will break it 
Any ideas what I can do to fix it?

also, why not indent for other types of braces

The '{' are handled by the indenter, '[' are not used on multiple lines (if there are no strange overloads ),
< require some more parsing (to distinguish if it is used in template or as operation).

slightly off-topic, but one reason I despise this feature is that it encourages coders to do this:

Code

void my_func(
                  int arg1, // random gibberish comment
                  char *arg2,
                  myclass arg3, // random gibberish comment
                  )

instead of

Code

// comment
void my_func(int arg1, char *arg2, myclass arg3);

Isn't that a problem of the coding standard/programmer? C::B is just a tool.
And if it is such a problem a config option could be added that is off by default.

even worse when they then do similar crap with the call, reducing the number of effective loc that I can fit on screen without really enhancing readability of the code.

Do you talk about this:

Code

api_with_many_params(param1, // here we set something
                           param2, // here we set something else
                           param3, // here we set something else
                           param4, // here we set something else
                           );

[oBFusCATed]

Hello again,

Here is the latest version of the patch.
I've fixed lots of problems, while using it (the patch wasn't working in lots of cases)
I've fixed the cout/quotes problem (the braces inside strings are ignored).
I've also made the patch to work when "Use Tab character" option is used (I think, I do the best I can in this mode).

I hope that someone from the devs team will find some time to review it,
so I can further polish it (fix bugs, some commenting, configuration option ...).
After that I hope it will be applied to trunk.

Best regards,
Teodor Petrov

[attachment deleted by admin]

[MortenMacFly]

I hope that someone from the devs team will find some time to review it,

I reviewed the past versions, too but in fact (sorry to say this) it was more annoying than helpful. Will try this one for sure. Looking forward to it! :-)

[oBFusCATed]

Don't be sorry, the patch version1 was totally broken.

Please report any problems you find.