There's two types in all kinds of editors ... the concept is that "as you type" validation reflects the *unsaved, unbuilt* contents of the document you are editing.
So, that's where you see underline. The problems-view type markers should only reflect the *saved, built* state of the document.
In general, all editors should behave similarly to the Java Editor in this regards.
So .. given that conceptual orientation, perhaps you could open specific bugs if/when you see things that could be improved?
| Cameron Bateman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/27/2006 10:39 PM
|
|
There seems to be two types of validation in the JSP editor. One kind
find problems like this:
<foo:bar>
where foo:bar is a tag that doesn't exist. This kind of validation is
normally instant (as you type) but it does not update markers. The
problem is underlined in the editor but neither the Problems view or the
navigator are decorated to tell you there is a problem even after you do
a clean build.
The second kind catches things like this:
<%@ taglib uri="http://java.sun.com/jsf/html" prefix="h"%>
<%@ taglib uri="http://java.sun.com/jsf/html" prefix="h"%>
Where the same prefix is used twice. This second case is identifiably
validated using the IValidator framework.
This raises the following questions in my mind:
1) Why are there two modes of validation?
2) Why is most validation is done in this first way that seems less
satisfactory given that is triggers no markers or build warnings?
--Cam
_______________________________________________
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
