How about mostly keeping the existing behaviour, but default to collisions being deselected? Then at least you don't need to search for it. It minimises the chance of missing it by mistake. The deselected item easily stands out to be reselected if required.
P.S. An additional side idea: If collision is from a superclass then append (Superclass>>name) to the list item, and clicking on it shows a code dialog to the right similar to Spotter code review pane, to make a review easier. cheers -ben On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 10:09 PM, Yuriy Tymchuk <[email protected]> wrote: > It shouldn’t be too intelligent. Keep the default behavior, and for each > method add a 3-state checkbox: create (default), skip, force (override). > Also having a usage recorder would be nice to know if developers are > actually checking the other state more often than the default one. > > Uko > > On 6 Dec 2016, at 13:03, Thierry Goubier <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > 2016-12-06 11:34 GMT+01:00 Denis Kudriashov <[email protected]>: >> >> >> 2016-12-06 11:28 GMT+01:00 Yuriy Tymchuk <[email protected]>: >>> >>> Additionally it was annoying if a superclass has a method with the same >>> name. For example if you have a name var and you create accessors I’d like >>> to have actually a ’name’ getter and not ’name1’ >> >> >> Yes >> > > If you start to make it so intelligent it requires half a dozen click to > generate a simple accessor, then people will stop using the refactoring and > write the code by hand... > > Thierry > > >
