Tim, We are planning to "teach" our intention action to recognize coding conventions. We also have the action to create class not from "new" operator but from first mentioning in our request base. Just stay tuned and give as a bit more time.
Best regards, Mike Aizatsky. ------------------------------ IntelliJ Software, "Develop with pleasure!" http://www.intellij.com > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:eap-features- > [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tim Mackinnon > Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 3:52 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Eap-features] TestFirst XP and create class on unknown type > > I work on an XP team and Martin Fowler often sings your praises so we > thought we would give it a go. In our early tests its very good - we are > very impressed. > > However I want to give you some XP feedback - in a test first environment > you often refer to types that are not there yet (you refer to them in your > test with the notion of creating them later) and I think you can do better > (although you are not bad).. > > I often create a test method and then refer to a type that isn't there > e.g. > > ServiceCalculator > > at this point you show red and only offer to create a field - this isn't > very helpful in an XP world and to be honest not many people create a > field > with a capitalised name - you really should offer a second option - create > Class and third Create Interface - this really would support XP and java. > > I say this becuase the next bit you type is a variable name (more often > than > not named a<typename> or f<typename> or my<typname> according to your > house > style (p.s. you handle this nicely with a nice LiveTemplate called prefix > with a $variable$ and a definitoin of captalize(suggestTypeName())) ) then > you type "new" and want to complete again (ahhh the tedium of Java). > > If you have already defined the type - and type "new" then complete works > well - it expands to the type you mentioned at the beginning. If the type > is > undefined (the normal case in test first) then you can't complete and have > to type the name again - at this point you do offer to create a class - > but > in test first its just too late and tedium has already set in. Creating > the > type at the beginning would be just so handy and then your normal rules > appy > (unless you created an interface - and then after the new you want either > a > list of conforming classes or an offer to create a new type that conforms > to > the interface). > > I know teh above is a bit tricky to read - but you do have the ability to > be > a leader in XP developement tools. > > Tim > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.325 / Virus Database: 182 - Release Date: 19/02/2002 > > > _______________________________________________ > Eap-features mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.intellij.com/mailman/listinfo/eap-features _______________________________________________ Eap-features mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.intellij.com/mailman/listinfo/eap-features
