-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 320
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[xtend generator] Migration of 'ContentAssistFragment'/'JavaBasedContentAssistFragment' #662
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Christian Schneider <christian.schneider@itemis.de>
/** | ||
* Extra getter facilitates customization by overriding. | ||
*/ | ||
def protected TypeReference getDefaultEObjectLabelProviderSuperClass() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is this used somewhere?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just a test of reviewers' attention ;-)
…ested in review Signed-off-by: Christian Schneider <christian.schneider@itemis.de>
Done with all your suggested improvements. Feel free to have another look! |
} | ||
|
||
|
||
// generation of the 'Abstract...ProposalProvider' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
same here
[xtend generator] Migration of 'ContentAssistFragment'/'JavaBasedContentAssistFragment'
} | ||
|
||
def protected TypeReference getGenProposalProviderSuperClass(Grammar g) { | ||
val superGrammar = g.nonTerminalsSuperGrammar |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One minor stylistic, subjective thing: With more involving expressions, an explicit return can often clarify the control flow. See getGenProposalProviderSuperClass
and in getFQFeatureNamesToExclude
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Agree. Actually I'm a fan of explicit return statements, but I wasn't sure whether you guys would use it in these cases.
Thanks for that remark :-)
Signed-off-by: Christian Schneider christian.schneider@itemis.de