Newsgroup would be better ... but for you Max, :) I'll address some of your question here.
If I was you, I would not change your "towards production I-builds" yet, if that's what you meant ...
when M9 is declared would be a better time.
But, you should have a developers workspace with recent I-build as target, and evaluate what it would take
to migrate, and if current functionality suits your needs.
For example, StructuredXMLEditor doesn't exist any more ... I assume you meant
StructuredTextEditor ... but, read the javadoc closely ... "not intended to
be subclassed". If we can get wsdlTextEditor and xsdTextEditor to continue
their clean up, as we plan to do, I'd even propose making it
final and its protected methods private, to avoid confusion over
the "do not subclass" part of the API. Please provide feedback if the
provided configuration extension points do not suit your needs.
(The goal is to allow extension by extension points, not subclassing, since
its easier to evolve in the future).
Not sure which extension point you meant, but most are name stable.
BTW, there *are* settings you can set to get the plugin.xml errors "to complain"
(not as good as Java Compiler, mind you, but pretty good).
The "content assist extension points" will not be in 1.0. We'll be
(looking at) following the platform's lead in this area (and they
are planning to "push down" content assist participants for 3.2.).
| "Max Rydahl Andersen"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/31/2005 03:34 AM
|
|
Hi,
(Not sure if this is best in the newsgroup or here, but just kick me if
its better for the newsgroup)
I'm in the grey zone at the moment since I have to figure out when I want
to move
my plugin code from WTP 0.7 to WTP 1.0.
As it stands I can see that the StructuredXMLEditor's api have been made
more public and that is good.
The question is - is that API considered stable at the moment ? Mainly if
the extension points name
and semantics are in place ? (api changes are easy to catch by the
compiler, but the xml in plugin.xml does
not complain if the extension point doesnt exist so damn hard to track
down ;)
Another thing is the quality of the code completion in XML (see
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=89811)
which basically makes it very hard to create a valid xml file when writing
the code by hand; and that does not
need to be the case but as far as I can see in the WTP code I can't easily
customize the code completion rules
for XML yet. e.g. I need to order the inserts by relevance (or even remove
non-valid xml).
My question is if work have been done in this area with respect to WTP 1.0
so I can actually get a real benefit
from upgrading to WTP 1.0 ? (I don't need all the functionallity, just the
possibility to order the proposals
by validity and add required attributes/tag automatically to the inserted
text - and hopefully without using
internal API)
thanks
--
--
Max Rydahl Andersen
callto://max.rydahl.andersen
Hibernate
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hibernate.org
JBoss Inc
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
wtp-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev
_______________________________________________ wtp-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev
