Whole Tomato Software Forums

Whole Tomato Software Forums

All Forums

Visual Assist

Feature Requests

Go to Type Declaration directly?

You must be registered to post a reply.
Click here to register.

Screensize:

UserName:

Password:

Format:

Message:

Forum code is on.
Html is off.

[quote][i]Originally posted by tandr[/i]
[br]Quite often if I am sitting on the piece of code that operates on struct or class members, I need to check "what else is there" in that struct, or (most common for me) to go to definition of operator= which is not handled by VAX yet (if ever be...).

To get to the definition of the struct I do double (or triple, in case of operator=) Alt-G -- first to jump to the current variable definition, then I move cursor to the type of the variable, and do Alt-G again to see the type definition.

I am not sure if there is a one-jump shortcut for the cases like these
where I can jump to the type declaration, not the variable declaration?

Worst case scenario example (C++, might be not compilable)

struct A {
 int i_; float f_; 
 A& operator=(const A& that);
};

A& A::operator=(const A& that) 
{ 
  i_ = that.i_;
  f_ = that.f_;
  return *this;
}

class C { 
  A aa_; 
  void func(const A& that)
  {
    aa_ =[red]|[/red] that;
  }
};

So, in the example above, I need to move cursor to aa_, then Alt-G, then move cursor to A, then Alt-G again, then go to operator=, and Alt-G again. If at least I would be able to just to "struct A" place directly from aa_, it would be great feature :)

Thank you very much,
  t.

PS. I am currently using VAX 1731 on VS2008

[/quote]

Check to include your profile signature.
Check to subscribe to this topic.

T O P I C R E V I E W
tandr	Posted - Sep 01 2009 : 11:12:49 AM Quite often if I am sitting on the piece of code that operates on struct or class members, I need to check "what else is there" in that struct, or (most common for me) to go to definition of operator= which is not handled by VAX yet (if ever be...). To get to the definition of the struct I do double (or triple, in case of operator=) Alt-G -- first to jump to the current variable definition, then I move cursor to the type of the variable, and do Alt-G again to see the type definition. I am not sure if there is a one-jump shortcut for the cases like these where I can jump to the type declaration, not the variable declaration? Worst case scenario example (C++, might be not compilable) struct A { int i_; float f_; A& operator=(const A& that); }; A& A::operator=(const A& that) { i_ = that.i_; f_ = that.f_; return *this; } class C { A aa_; void func(const A& that) { aa_ =\| that; } }; So, in the example above, I need to move cursor to aa_, then Alt-G, then move cursor to A, then Alt-G again, then go to operator=, and Alt-G again. If at least I would be able to just to "struct A" place directly from aa_, it would be great feature :) Thank you very much, t. PS. I am currently using VAX 1731 on VS2008
7 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First)
sean	Posted - Sep 02 2009 : 12:01:09 PM They are both good ideas and aren't mutually exclusive.
znakeeye	Posted - Sep 02 2009 : 06:59:13 AM I have pinpointed this at least twice before (see http://forum.wholetomato.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6703). The solution is so simple: Always put the cursor at an identifier, NOT at the beginning of the line. Why? This makes it possible for "incremental" Alt+G functionality: CMyClass myClass; myClass\| = foo; Alt+G jumps to variable above, producing this: CMyClass myClass\|; myClass = foo; Alt+G jumps to type, producing this: CMyClass\| myClass; myClass = foo; Alt+G jumps to implementation, producing this: class CMyClass\| I really cannot understand why you did not implement it like this from the beginning. It's 100% intuitive.
sean	Posted - Sep 01 2009 : 8:36:17 PM thanks for input.
tandr	Posted - Sep 01 2009 : 5:02:31 PM quote: Originally posted by sean As an independent command, does the command do nothing if not invoked on an instance of a variable? if this thing is not something that has type and storage, then yes, it should do nothing (imho). Well, it is probably should apply to "int aa" cases as well -- do not jump to definition of "int" or "void" (in case of "void* p" ). In these cases I would love to see tooltip popping up with definition of that variable or message "inti is not declared" so at least I would know why it did not jump there. OTOH, it it did not jump on Alt-@ to the type definition, then I probably will try Alt-G immediately anyway, so tooltip is really optional :) tandr PS. Alt-@ is a placeholder for whatever shortcut it is going to be.
sean	Posted - Sep 01 2009 : 4:18:23 PM As an independent command, does the command do nothing if not invoked on an instance of a variable?
tandr	Posted - Sep 01 2009 : 12:45:51 PM quote: Originally posted by sean We are looking into doing this. case=9113 There are two options for starting this: - make it a separate bindable command or - append the additional location to the current goto menu (similar to how alt+g on a function gives you two choices) (optionally so that the old alt+g behavior can be retained) I think this would only apply to alt+g when invoked on variables... any thoughts? Make both available - as option on Go-To suggestion box and as separate shortcut? I can see some people would prefer Alt-G having Type info appended, and once they will get used to it, they will search for shorter shortcut (Alt-T? Shift-Alt-G?) . For heavy users they might find it annoying a bit, so to have option "Show Type in go-to suggestion box" would be welcomed.
sean	Posted - Sep 01 2009 : 12:34:16 PM We are looking into doing this. case=9113 There are two options for starting this: - make it a separate bindable command or - append the additional location to the current goto menu (similar to how alt+g on a function gives you two choices) (optionally so that the old alt+g behavior can be retained) I think this would only apply to alt+g when invoked on variables... any thoughts?

Snitz Forums 2000