• cursor movements to parameter section,


• select parameters part,


• copy parameters part,


• cursor movements to method name,


• Alt+G,


• cursor movements to parameter section,


• select parameter section,


• paste,


• Navigate Back

class CTestClass
{
    void memberFunction(int nHeader, int nHasOneThing);
};

quote:

---

Originally posted by feline
-skip-
If so you can simply use Change Signature on the function, and VA will then apply the parameter names you set in Change Signature to both the declaration and the implementation.

---

• Signature changed in editor and single short-cut correct it in definition/implementation depends on invoking place. Invoking place is etalon for signature
  


• You can keep multiline formatting. I think, many developers are not used change signature because it removes formatting and dialog is too plain (you have requests to improve it )
  


• After compile error: signature differ i can correct error in single short-cut
  


• As i examined "change signature" gets definition as etalon,
  but usually signature changed in implementation and then corrected in definition. I propose get as etalon editing position.
  I assume that there are limitations if cursor in implementation (static, defaults) but this, i suppose, can be easily merged
  


• Change signature works only if carrent is over method's name. It because VA canges signature using symbol under carret and it can be method of another class. Really rare used... I propose to activate parameter synchronization everywere in method's scope it will save time instead of aiming to method name
  

quote:

---

Originally posted by feline

Point 2 and point 3 conflict. If we have to consider the case that the signature on the implementation is wrong - wrong number of parameters - then we are going to have to change it to fix it. As soon as we change it we are running the current Change Signature command.

---

quote:

---

We cannot just add or remove parameters and preserve the formatting of the code without further work. Change Signature changing / loosing the formatting is a known problem:

case=1631

but it is actually a hard problem. It is easy to think up edge cases where simple answers do not work.

---

class CTestClass
{
    virtual void memberFunction(
       int nHeader, // header of something 
       int nHasOneThing = 10 // 10 is default value
    ) const;
};

void CTestClass::memberFunction(
   int nHeader, // header of something 
   int nHasOneThing // 10 is default value
) const
{
}

quote:

---

Change Signature picking up the parameter names from the declaration is also a known problem:

case=9327

but in your case this is more debatable. Using the sample code I posted VA cannot know which names you prefer. As soon as it picks names from one location it can be wrong half of the time, on average.

---

quote:

---

Running Change Signature from anywhere on the line is an interesting idea, but it raises some interesting questions. This means you can trigger Change Signature while the caret is in the middle of white space, or a keyword.

---

quote:

---

How come you are running into this problem so often?

Are you using VA's rename command to rename the parameter in the implementation? This will rename the references inside the implementation, but does not currently rename the declaration. This is on our list of things to change:

case=1140

and would stop this problem occurring in the first place.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by feline

I am not sure I understand. Are you saying you have this situation:

class CTestClass
{
    void memberFunction(int nHeader, int nHasOneThing);
};

and in the cpp file:

void CTestClass::memberFunction(int nCppFile, int nIsDifferent) { }
If so you can simply use Change Signature on the function, and VA will then apply the parameter names you set in Change Signature to both the declaration and the implementation.

---

#define MY_API __declspec(dllexport)
//...
class CMyClass {
    MY_API void foo();
};

MY_API void CMyClass::foo() {//compiler error in this line!!
//...
}

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dans

So it why i posted my first suggestion about quick navigation: http://forum.wholetomato.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6487.
I can quick navigate to implementation/declaration and analyse where is the problem and then press synchroization shortcut.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by feline

We cannot just add or remove parameters and preserve the formatting of the code without further work. Change Signature changing / loosing the formatting is a known problem:

case=1631

---

class CTestClass
{
    void memberFunction(int nHeader, int nHasOneThing);
};


void CTestClass::memberFunction(int nCppFile, int nIsDifferent) { }

class CTestClass
{
    void memberFunction2(int singleParameter);
};


void CTestClass::memberFunction2(int firstParameter, int secondParameter, int thirdParameter) { }

class CTestClass
{
    void memberFunction3(int longParamaterNameHere, int n1, int n2,
            int n3, int n4,
            int n5);
};


void CTestClass::memberFunction3(int longParamaterNameHere,
            int n1, int n2, int n3, int n4, int n5) { }

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dans

It's not a problem, if i decided to change signature from current location it's equal to that i know what i do and i what parameters i need. In other case user should keep in mind why it uses different param names and decline from using change signature at all.

---

class CTestCode
{
    int memberFunction4(int nHeaderParamName);
};

int CTestCode::memberFunction4(int nCppParamName) { }

static void callFunction()
{
    CTestCode foo;
    foo.memberFunction4(32);  // trigger Change Signature HERE
}

class CTestCode
{
    int memberFunction5(int);
};

int CTestCode::memberFunction4(int nCppParamName) { }

quote:

---

Originally posted by sl@sh

There is also an apparent problem in Change Signature: If the declaration contains a macro (e. g. for _decl specification), then this macro will also be inserted for the implementation - which is wrong for _declspec! Ok, VA probably doesn't know what this macro is for, but in function declarations the only sensible use of macros usually is for _decl specifications - which mustn't be used inside the implementation files!

---

class CTestClass
{
    void memberFunction5() MACRO_HERE;
};

#define CLASS class

CLASS CTestClass
{
    // members here
};

class bugCreateImplementation
{
    static void __declspec(noreturn) dllExportedFunction();
};

#ifdef FIREAPI_DLL_BUILD
#define FIREAPI_DLL_SPEC __declspec(dllexport)
#else
#define FIREAPI_DLL_SPEC __declspec(dllimport)
#endif

#ifdef UNIX
#define FIREAPI_DLL_SPEC
#endif

quote:

---

--skipped--
I am now completely confused.

I see no obvious connection between having a navigation history of *more than* 20 places and jumping between the implementation and declaration of a function.

---

quote:

---

When I need to jump between the implementation and declaration of a function I use either alt-g to go directly to the function, or alt-o to jump to the matching file.

---