[jbosstools-dev] [Fwd: [JBoss Tools (users)] - Project MYPROJECT doesn't have KB nature.]

[Victor V. Rubezhny]

> Victor, please remember to reply-all and not just me ;)

I'm, sorry. I forgot.


> Victor V. Rubezhny wrote:
> > In old CA we've used a knowledge base that had all the data on
> > tags/attributes/enumerations stored in XML-formatted files  for each
> TLD and
> > schema that might be used by a user.  There were the tons of XMLs for
> all
> > the known TLDs/Schemas we have had to support. Many of  these XMLs
> were
> > generated by the converter program but finally almost all of them
> were
> > edited by the hand to specify some default tag attributes or default
> > attribute values or descriptions etc. It was really hard to support
> and
> > renew all this staff.
> >
> Ok. Don't we have a way of "enhancing" the completions today in case
> the
> metadata is not complete ?
> or is that just not relevant anymore ?

At the moment (with new CA) it doesn't matters on what libraries are used
within the project - we'll generate proposals on any library included (And
event on a user's self made libraries)

> > Of course, as  the second part of CA there was a dynamic part which
> proposed
> > a user with dynamic things like actions, path, images and other
> dynamic
> > values within the project.
> >
> Yes...but these does not require a builder nor nature to be in place do
> they ?
> We should try and fail gracefully in case of missing information...
> 
> btw. now that the "global" cache is gone are the completions as good as
> before ?
> Are there some things missing compared to before which we could get
> from
> the old knowledge base but
> not the new ?

Of course no builder nor nature required to generate dynamic proposals (such
as default attributes for tags to insert or some known attribute values to
propose). But we need something to collect the information on libraries used
in the project and its dependencies. Users may add or remove the libraries
to/from their projects during the project development. And we suppose that
to have a builder to collect this information and process the changes is
most cheapest and effective way. The completion now is even more complete
and actual than it was before. 

On the libraries (TLDs and Schemas) there is missing things (even more: now
we have completions for any library used in a project). 
We converted all the dynamic knowledge base stores (they were used to
generate dynamic proposals depending on the project structure) to the new CA
libraries. It has to cover 100% of old CA functionality.

> > As the result of CA refactoring we turned to use dynamic KB
> generation
> > depending on the libraries used in the project. All the special
> things (such
> > as predefined values, default tag attributes , default attribute
> values and
> > so on) are stored in slightly compact difference XMLs, but all the
> other
> > things are generated automatically for each library used in the
> project.
> >
> Okey....
> > We saved the disk space (because we don't need to store the tons of
> > information on each Tag library in the world) and the time (because
> we don't
> > need to prepare XMLs for each new library by the hand), but now we
> need a
> > builder that's doing this work for us on startup and on the fly if a
> user
> > adds some new library to its project.
> >
> We do cache these things, right ? If we do this per project aren't we
> going to add a massive overhead ?
> > Probably you're right and I'll be able to start KB-builder (and
> prepare the
> > .project file) when the CA will generate an error. But the builder
> takes a
> > time to parse all the libraries used in the project and its
> dependencies,
> Yes, but then why not have the code completion show a completion that
> says: "Enable JSF(?) code completion on this project" in
> case it is not there and if users select that install the
> builder/nature

Yes we can have such completion proposal. 

> ?  btw. can't we avoid having these builders/natures
> if we already got one of our jsf/seam/you-name-it builders/validators
> already installed ? Just trying to avoid creating
> too many events.
> 

This is a question to Alex. 
But IMHO, the incremental builder doesn't take too much time to update the
structure, so it doesn't make an overload to the JBoss Tools performance. 


> >   so
> > I suppose that the kosher way is to set up a builder and KB-nature at
> > project startup, but not when a user wants to be prompted with
> something.
> >
> Well, for existing projects there is no such thing as "project startup"
> ....

I supposed that. But the way you proposed (to have a special completion
proposal to enable JSF code completion on a project) would be a good
solution.

> 
> /max
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: winmail.dat
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 4694 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jbosstools-dev/attachments/20090805/04ac35fa/attachment-0001.bin