Developer forums (C::B DEVELOPMENT STRICTLY!) > CodeCompletion redesign
vector<int> is OK, but string or wstring no-work.
ollydbg:
After that, CC works now !!!!
Loaden:
SVN 6077, this code work now.
--- Code: ---#include <iostream>
#include <string>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
basic_string<char> bs;
bs.append("work fine!");
basic_string<wchar_t> wbs;
wbs.append(L"work too!");
return 0;
}
--- End code ---
[attachment deleted by admin]
Loaden:
--- Quote from: ollydbg on January 12, 2010, 03:47:36 pm ---After that, CC works now !!!!
--- End quote ---
Great! Thank you very much! :lol:
MortenMacFly:
--- Quote from: ollydbg on January 12, 2010, 03:47:36 pm ---After that, CC works now !!!!
--- End quote ---
Not for me. :-(
What happens if you just open the TESTING workspace of the CC plugin, activate the STL project, open stl.cpp and uncomment the "ss.". CC does not kick in for me!
And btw: I had that replacement in the conf file of C::B. Nevertheless it is missing in the code in trunk.
In the original code the order in how the strings were replaced (when replacing in the whole buffer) did matter. I don't think it does so in the current version as it is based on the appearance of the tokens, but just to double check: Is that correct?
ollydbg:
--- Quote from: MortenMacFly on January 12, 2010, 06:44:30 pm ---
--- Quote from: ollydbg on January 12, 2010, 03:47:36 pm ---After that, CC works now !!!!
--- End quote ---
Not for me. :-(
What happens if you just open the TESTING workspace of the CC plugin, activate the STL project, open stl.cpp and uncomment the "ss.". CC does not kick in for me!
--- End quote ---
It works here. You can see the screenshot as an attachment.
--- Quote from: MortenMacFly on January 12, 2010, 06:44:30 pm ---In the original code the order in how the strings were replaced (when replacing in the whole buffer) did matter. I don't think it does so in the current version as it is based on the appearance of the tokens, but just to double check: Is that correct?
--- End quote ---
In the replacement map( wxString Key to wxString Value), I don't think current code has some thing wrong, because each "wxString Key" are different. right? Oh, I can confirm that what you concern won't happen. because when the Tokenizer DoGetToken, they will return a whole "Token string", thus, "_GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_TR1" and "_GLIBCXX_END_NAMESPACE" are totally different tokens when we are at the last stage of the DoGetToken() function.
Finally, I think the answer is :"it is correct". :D
[attachment deleted by admin]
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version