Developer forums (C::B DEVELOPMENT STRICTLY!) > CodeCompletion redesign

Clang CC

<< < (34/48) > >>

l_inc:
yvesdm3000

--- Quote ---Some do the for( ; ; ) and break thing but I find it cluttering and misuse of the for loop
--- End quote ---
Yes, that's using a more complicated mechanism to simulate a better fitting primitive one. This consideration also allows to view a do { /*...*/ } while(0); construct as a more appropriate replacement, although still ugly. I actually preferred nesting of the if (/*...*/) {/*...*/} construct. But in all cases that only stops further proceeding and therefore is only half of the story. The second half is to deallocate the resources, which needs more clutter of constructs. I used a switch with all fall-through cases:

--- Code: ---NTSTATUS HighlyNestedFun()
{
NTSTATUS ntStatus = STATUS_SUCCESS;
enum failure_stage {success, res1_failure, res2_failure, res3_failure, res4_failure, res5_failure}
failureStage = success;
HANDLE hRes1, hRes2, hRes3, hRes4, hRes5;

hRes1 = AcquireResource1();
if (!hRes1)
ntStatus = STATUS_INSUFFICIENT_RESOURCES1, failureStage = res1_failure;
else
{
hRes2 = AcquireResource2();
if (!hRes2)
ntStatus = STATUS_INSUFFICIENT_RESOURCES2, failureStage = res2_failure;
else
{
hRes3 = AcquireResource3();
if (!hRes3)
ntStatus = STATUS_INSUFFICIENT_RESOURCES3, failureStage = res3_failure;
else
{
hRes4 = AcquireResource4();
if (!hRes4)
ntStatus = STATUS_INSUFFICIENT_RESOURCES4, failureStage = res4_failure;
else
{
hRes5 = AcquireResource5();
if (!hRes5)
ntStatus = STATUS_INSUFFICIENT_RESOURCES5, failureStage = res5_failure;
else
{
//using acquired resources
}
}
}
}
}

switch (failureStage)
{
case success:
FreeResource5(hRes5);
case res5_failure:
FreeResource4(hRes4);
case res4_failure:
FreeResource3(hRes3);
case res3_failure:
FreeResource2(hRes2);
case res2_failure:
FreeResource1(hRes1);
case res1_failure:
}

return ntStatus;
}
--- End code ---
But eventually I came to the conclusion that all this clutter is nothing but an odd simulation of a much clearer use of goto's. Limiting goto use to these cases only also contributes to code clearness, because the semantics of resource allocation error handling is then quickly recognized from the sole appearance of goto in the code.


--- Quote ---I guess it should have a list of filenames (e.g. the top-parent of the translation unit) to select under which context you wish to view the header file?
--- End quote ---
Yes. In contrast to your idea to switch back and forth between the file and possible roots of the corresponding translation units this also allows to cover some convoluted cases, in which the same file within the same project serves both as a root of a translation unit as well as an included file.

yvesdm3000:
You can always post bugs and feature requests here:

https://github.com/yvesdm3000/ClangLib/issues

I've allready done it for the compound literals issue. I'll also add the header-tu-scope feature request too if you don't. ;-)

Yves

l_inc:
yvesdm3000

--- Quote ---You can always post bugs and feature requests here
--- End quote ---
Thank you. I have to think about creating an account on github first. :-)

yvesdm3000:
For those that like bleeding edge, I pushed a new feature on the 'staging' branch that allows you to apply the fixits automatically, but only if your cursor is at least 2 lines away from the fixit line. It is disabled by default so you'll have to enable it in the settings.

Yves

yvesdm3000:
Hi,

I pushed a new feature to the 'staging' branch that lets the user configure if they want the 'if/else/for/while' constructs in code-completion or not. While I was at it, I also added the feature where you can toggle if you want macros in code-completion or not.

Yves

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page