Find Usages - incomplete results!

I know this will be a little unbelievable, I don't believe it myself, having been an IdeaJ used for many years and LOVING it, but...

I have a constants file which has a fairly large number of constants contained therein. I ran an "unused declarations" inspection on the file. the following constant was listed:
STATUS_CID_PRVDR_APP_RVW_STEPS_IN_PROCESS

So I commented out the constant and compiled the project within IdeaJ. I got a compilation error in another file (within a different package). I jumped over to that file and sure enough it was being used - and IdeaJ had it marked as red.

So I deleted the comment in the constants file. And the red mark in the using file went away. I was able to compile file.

I went back to the constants file and did a "Find Usages" on the constant - and IdeaJ told me there were no usages found.

I went to the place the constant is being used and hit Ctrl-B to go to the definition and indeed it took me to the correct place! But another Find Usages failed to bring me back to the use!

I checked the module settings and there are no exclusions.

Any thoughts? Is this a bug?

12 comments
Comment actions Permalink

Yes, the broken inspections drives me nuts too. Unfortunately I had no time
to set up a (larger) example. The problem already existed in the latest
release version, it not just was introduced in the EAP.

Tom

0
Comment actions Permalink

Oh, that makes it two of us, I guess. A while ago I made a post[/url] about missing Find Usages result, but I had no definite answer and decided to just wait for the next build. This is a very serious problem -- if I can't trust Find Usages, IDEA will lose most of it's usefulness to me.

0
Comment actions Permalink

I've only seen this occurring as the result of an earlier exception,
which presumably borked things.
R

0
Comment actions Permalink

Hello simonoff,

This is indeed serious and we're keen for a sample we can reliably debug.

-


Maxim Shafirov
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


0
Comment actions Permalink

I'll try to create a sample based on what I am doing in these classes that reliably reproduces the problem. Unfortunately, there is no way for me to send you the classes from our production system.

0
Comment actions Permalink

I'll try to create a reduced sample - unfortunately I can not send you our source.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Well, I had an AWFUL LOT of cases where idea 6 beta was wrong with the find usages, both in 5569 and in 5581 ( http://intellij.net/forums/message.jspa?messageID=5137257#5137257 ): then I reverted to 5.1.2, which I find buggy, but not so buggy.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Ok, it is IdeaJ-9030 - I have a reproducable example after about 3 days straight of hacking code away.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Hello simonoff,

Not sure what IdeaJ-9030 is but can I please have a look at example?

-


Maxim Shafirov
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

Ok, it is IdeaJ-9030 - I have a reproducable example after about 3
days straight of hacking code away.



0
Comment actions Permalink

hehe :)

I've got it:

http://www.jetbrains.net/jira/browse/IDEA-9030

It is the jira issue key.

Greetings!


Maxim Shafirov (JetBrains) wrote:

Hello simonoff,

Not sure what IdeaJ-9030 is but can I please have a look at example?

------------------
Maxim Shafirov
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

>> Ok, it is IdeaJ-9030 - I have a reproducable example after about 3
>> days straight of hacking code away.
>>


0
Comment actions Permalink

Hello George,

Thanks! :)

-


Maxim Shafirov
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

hehe :)

I've got it:

http://www.jetbrains.net/jira/browse/IDEA-9030

It is the jira issue key.

Greetings!

Maxim Shafirov (JetBrains) wrote:

>> Hello simonoff,
>>
>> Not sure what IdeaJ-9030 is but can I please have a look at example?
>>
>> -


>> Maxim Shafirov
>> JetBrains, Inc
>> http://www.jetbrains.com
>> "Develop with pleasure!"
>>> Ok, it is IdeaJ-9030 - I have a reproducable example after about 3
>>> days straight of hacking code away.
>>>


0
Comment actions Permalink

The issue you face is caused by very big file (>1MB) containing the usage. This is really an old issue, present at least in 4.0. Must be fixed in the next EAP.

0

Please sign in to leave a comment.