| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
stukad
Junior Member
13 Posts |
|
|
feline
Whole Tomato Software
United Kingdom
19020 Posts |
 Posted - Sep 10 2007 : 10:15:09 AM
|
I looked over their list of refactoring's a little while ago, and concluded that we offer most of them, just under different names, and sometimes using a different approach.
I am not sure what you mean about ugly tooltips. Depending on the IDE you are using, half the time the tooltips you are seeing are actually from the IDE its self. VA tooltips are designed to look like IDE tooltips, for constancy.
Highlighting what you are refactoring, I am not quite sure what you mean here. For example what is there to refactor with Change Signature? You get a dialog showing you the current signature, which you edit.
When Find References has been run you can ask VA to highlight the references.
I am certainly very interested in ideas and suggestions, but I am not really sure what you are getting at here. |
zen is the art of being at one with the two'ness |
 |
|
|
stukad
Junior Member
13 Posts |
|
|
feline
Whole Tomato Software
United Kingdom
19020 Posts |
Posted - Sep 10 2007 : 5:16:28 PM
|
Point 1, is that simply changing the formatting of the code?
I see the appeal, but I also know that as soon as we try to do something like that we will get 15 different users all insisting we change the formatting we use. Currently we try to avoid getting into the whole question of code formatting, since especially in C++ people have very fixed opinions on code formatting, and you need to offer a LOT of options to keep everyone happy.
Point 2, the change signature looks interesting, certainly more "helpful", but once you know what you are doing also a lot slower. We made a design decision with refactoring to try and keep out of the users way as much as possible, and to avoid asking them a lot of questions when they trigger a command. So our Change Signature dialog is rather "stark", it also lets you make all the changes you want "just like that".
Point 3, I agree, that is a very good tooltip. Is that appearing when you use the main IDE menu bar, or only on some other context menu? Just looking at VS2005, the IDE is not even bothering to place any information onto the status bar to tell you what each menu item is going to do, which is something many simpler programs do.
Point 4, You can re-order the parameters with Change Signature, but I agree, this is not quite so "easy". Personally it is fairly rare that I want to re-order parameters, while I often find myself wanting to add parameters, or add a default value to a parameter. All of which I can do with Change Signature, but again this may not be that obvious.
Point 5, the arrow's interest me, but I am so used to people posting questions about C++ code that looks like:
static void whatIsTheOrderOfExecutionHere()
{
int nFoo;
#ifdef SETTING_ONE
nFoo = 1;
#elif SETTING_TWO
nFoo = 2;
#else
nFoo = 3;
#endif
}
That I immediately wonder how well they really work in the real world. At this point you need to be the compiler to figure out the code flow. VA does not try to "know" the actual state of all of these pre-processor directives.
One thing that is clear here, VA is less "intuitive". For an experienced user this can be a good thing, since VA gets out of your way and lets you work, but this makes it harder to learn what VA can do...
There is a rather important point here, and this is something we need to think about. Thank you  |
zen is the art of being at one with the two'ness |
|
|
|
stukad
Junior Member
13 Posts |
Posted - Sep 11 2007 : 12:29:06 PM
|
quote:
Point 1, is that simply changing the formatting of the code?
Yes.
quote:
Is that appearing when you use the main IDE menu bar, or only on some other context menu?
It`s just in their refactor menu and it helps if you are new to that software.
And about 5) and the preprocessor commands. It`s a quite interesting question. I made one more screenshot. http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/6940/13044159fg1.jpg
Seams to work well. I find that`s great. |
|
|
|
holedigger
Whole Tomato Software
145 Posts |
Posted - Sep 11 2007 : 3:42:15 PM
|
Can you try 5) again with this code:
int main()
{
while (1)
{
#if defined(_DEBUG)
break;
#elif defined(NDEBUG)
continue;
#else
goto end;
#endif
}
end:
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
Does the current project configuration (debug/release) make a difference?
thanks.
|
Whole Tomato Software |
|
|
|
stukad
Junior Member
13 Posts |
Posted - Sep 12 2007 : 10:58:50 AM
|
| It matches always also, also goto end. Debug/Release seams to trick it. |
|
|
|
holedigger
Whole Tomato Software
145 Posts |
Posted - Sep 12 2007 : 5:45:50 PM
|
interesting. thank you.
|
Whole Tomato Software |
|
|
|
Sasa
Tomato Guru
272 Posts |
Posted - Sep 12 2007 : 9:07:19 PM
|
| I must admit that Refactor Pro is getting better and better for C++, although VAX is still numero uno :) |
C++
Visual Studio 2008 Pro
Windows 7 x64
|
|
|
|
AGPX
Senior Member
28 Posts |
Posted - Sep 14 2007 : 08:59:13 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sasa
I must admit that Refactor Pro is getting better and better for C++, although VAX is still numero uno :)
I agree, But first of all VAX is ten times better in performance.I've seen the performance difference in a large scale project.CPU usage and memory usage is too much in Refactor.You don't even feel weight of VAX during development.Refactor tries to parse all data in IDE's thread and this locks thread during that long process.Also it tries to parse sources when a refactor request is done.Also VAX refactorings are far realiable than Refactor!.
But Refactor Pro's refactoring options and user interface is quite better.And they are improving their system.Also Microsoft thinks of using it in its next versions of VS. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
copy from refactor pro
