Ok, if you say, IDEA inserts a "a", than it's more a bug than a feature, I
would think.
Tom
PS: Couldn't the equals default implementation not ensured with a simple
Live template? Lets say, you expand "eq" to a full blown equals method:
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
if (obj == null || obj.getClass() != getClass()) {
return false;
}
return |
}
At 09:29 06.03.02 +0100, you wrote:
>"Thomas Singer wrote:
> > >The name of the enclosing class as the default type value would make more
> > >sense (than "a"):
> > Why it would make more sense? I can't remember a situation, where I cast
>to
> > the same class I'm in.
>
>Can you remember a situation where you casted to a class called "a"?
>
>There are at least 2 situations, that are generic enough to appears in
>dozens of java.* classes :
> public int compareTo( Object o )
> public boolean equals (Object o )
>
>Even if you say "I never override equals(), nor implement compareTo", I
>suspect you don't have a class called "a".
>So, why does IDEA suggest "a".
>
>I read somewhere in the list that IDEA was becoming more intelligent, by
>watching the users' habits, and adapting its suggestions to the gathered
>info, and the context.
>Detecting that you are in equals(), or compareTo() would be smart.
>Can we expect to be smarter in the future? The recent past makes me say
>"YES".
>
>Alain Ravet
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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
