"Remove braces from if-statement" intention

How to get rid of this intention? In contrast with other intentions (e.g.
create method), it is instantly available and sometimes I click it, because
the create method intention is not yet available. All my code blocks are
wrapped in curly braces and I never would use that intention.

Tom

47 comments

Hello Christoffer,

CH> IDEA would be so much better if the customers could edit the source,
CH> contribute patches, and so on.

Users can edit the source of the Subversion plugin, contribute patches and
so on for more than a year already, but for some reason I don't see it becoming
so much better. Neither is Perforce, JavaScript or any of the other plugins
the source for which, licensed under the Apache 2 license, is included in
the Plugin Development Package.

--
Dmitry Jemerov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc.
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


0

Dmitry Jemerov (JetBrains) wrote:

Hello Christoffer,

CH> IDEA would be so much better if the customers could edit the source,
CH> contribute patches, and so on.

Users can edit the source of the Subversion plugin, contribute patches
and so on for more than a year already, but for some reason I don't see
it becoming so much better. Neither is Perforce, JavaScript or any of
the other plugins the source for which, licensed under the Apache 2
license, is included in the Plugin Development Package.


I'm sorry, but you're missing the point. The problem is that users don't
have the source for all of IDEA, which is what i think Keith was
talking about in the post i responded to.

Kreiger



Attachment(s):
signature.asc
0

IDEA would be so much better if the customers could edit the source,
contribute patches, and so on.


ROFL
Idea would be so much worse without a strong leadership and tightly
controlled and tested source code.
I'd rather file a Jira request, justify why it is useful and see it
implemented in a week or so, than have endless discussions with everybody
and his cat about why this feature is needed and then which of the
three dozen ways to implement it is best and then when it is not trivial
to implement or maybe even needs changes in multiple modules see everything
stalled for months on.

0

Hello Christoffer,

>> CH> IDEA would be so much better if the customers could edit the
>> source, CH> contribute patches, and so on.
>>
>> Users can edit the source of the Subversion plugin, contribute
>> patches and so on for more than a year already, but for some reason I
>> don't see it becoming so much better. Neither is Perforce, JavaScript
>> or any of the other plugins the source for which, licensed under the
>> Apache 2 license, is included in the Plugin Development Package.
>>
CH> I'm sorry, but you're missing the point. The problem is that users
CH> don't have the source for all of IDEA, which is what i think Keith
CH> was talking about in the post i responded to.

If having source to 20% of IDEA leads to nearly zero contributions, why having
source to 100% of IDEA will have any greater effect?

I can definitely agree that people would be able to use the source as comprehensive
plugin development documentation. It's definitely easier to understand how
and why things are happening if you can see and debug the entire code. This
would definitely enable people to implement somewhat more sophisticated functionality
in their plugins, and would possibly increase somewhat the number of plugins.

However, I don't believe that many people would actually contribute any code
to IDEA if they had the possibility.

--
Dmitry Jemerov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc.
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


0

I fully agree with you though.
IDEA would be so much better if the customers could edit the source,
contribute patches, and so on.


I whole-heartly doubt it. Although Eclipse' or Netbeans' code is available
trying to find the root of a problem is quite impossible for someone who
does not is involved in this project.

To me, there is only one point for making code open source: reputation.
Every one who says "well, than everybody could edit the code" is missing the
reality.

Tom

0

Completely agree. Demanding to make an application open source is one (very
easy) point, using the possibility to edit the code a completely different one.

Tom

0

Two points from the list:
- Null reference analysis
- Improved syntax recovery

Seems they are slowly catching up.

Dave Griffith schrieb:

Somwhat humorously, Eclipse just added this.

http://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/downloads/drops/S-3.2M5-200602171115/eclipse-news-M5.html

--Dave Griffith

0

I don't see how it would do anything but help JB
revenue. I'm not asking JB to change their pricing
model. I'm asking for the source, as a paying
customer.


Now I got it -- something similar to what Atlassian does. That would be really, really nice.

0

Now I got it -- something similar to what Atlassian does. That would be really, really nice.


But does it help to improve IDEA? How much users have found and solved bugs
in JIRA? I just can remember a lot of support questions in their mailing
list how to get it compiling, because they decided to use Maven, which is
not everybody's friend.

Tom

0

Hm, isn't that "Introduce Indirection" quite similar to "change signature" in Idea with the "delegate" option selected?

Dave Griffith wrote:

Eh. Except for the refactoring scripts and the "Introduce Indirection" refactoring, I don't see anything IDEA hasn't had for at least a year.

--Dave Griffith

0

But does it help to improve IDEA? How much users have
found and solved bugs in JIRA?


If you check the JIRA JIRA, you'll see a number of issues reported by customers with fixes/proposed fixes attached to them. I don't have statistics, but there are contributions.

The second benefit is plugin development. I believe many companies out there have developed custom extensions for private use, some of them using non-standard API's. The company I'm currently working on has done that.

Moreover, I agree with Keith on this one: I don't see how it could hurt JetBrains. It's not like people would pirate IDEA, or buy fewer licenses. One would still need a license (maybe an 'enterprise' one) to access the source code.

0

Stephen Kelvin wrote:
>> IDEA would be so much better if the customers could edit the source,
>> contribute patches, and so on.


ROFL
Idea would be so much worse without a strong leadership and tightly
controlled and tested source code.
I'd rather file a Jira request, justify why it is useful and see it
implemented in a week or so, than have endless discussions with everybody
and his cat about why this feature is needed and then which of the
three dozen ways to implement it is best and then when it is not trivial
to implement or maybe even needs changes in multiple modules see everything
stalled for months on.


Yes you got me, i was obviously advocating against all that. And the
truth must be that i, umm... hate JetBrains, and want to take IDEA away
from them? Yes, that must be it.

</sarcasm>

Seriously, i don't see how it could hurt JetBrains or IDEA if they made
the source available to customers, the same people who already are
contributing to IDEA by making plugins, and who obviously are interested
in making IDEA a better product.

Kreiger



Attachment(s):
signature.asc
0

I think the subversion plugin is boring and most people probably don't use it. I've never used subversion support.

Our team has made significant modifications to Perforce plugin and we plan to submit them once we get some more feedback from testers internally. (We're also waiting for fix for IDEADEV-4485 to be backported to 5.1.x series, otherwise our modifications produce intermittent unavoidable exceptions.)

I think for Javascript plugin to improve, Language API would have to improve, because JS plugin stretches the API to its limits, so maybe this is why no one has committed changes to it.

0

Hello Keith,

KL> I think for Javascript plugin to improve, Language API would have to
KL> improve

That is not true. The new functionality of JavaScript added in version 5.1
was implemented without any changes to the Language API.

--
Dmitry Jemerov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc.
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


0

Stephen, I think you should re-read thread, no one is asking for weak leadership or untested code. No one is asking for JB to give commit access to anyone but JB employees. We want the source, not to make IDEA code a wiki.

ROFL
Idea would be so much worse without a strong
leadership and tightly
controlled and tested source code.
I'd rather file a Jira request, justify why it is
useful and see it
implemented in a week or so, than have endless
discussions with everybody
and his cat about why this feature is needed and then
which of the
three dozen ways to implement it is best and then
when it is not trivial
to implement or maybe even needs changes in multiple
modules see everything
stalled for months on.


0

In article <dtci22$ij7$1@is.intellij.net>, kreiger@imcode.com says...

Stephen Kelvin wrote:
>> IDEA would be so much better if the customers could edit the source,
>> contribute patches, and so on.


ROFL
Idea would be so much worse without a strong leadership and tightly
controlled and tested source code.
I'd rather file a Jira request, justify why it is useful and see it
implemented in a week or so, than have endless discussions with everybody
and his cat about why this feature is needed and then which of the
three dozen ways to implement it is best and then when it is not trivial
to implement or maybe even needs changes in multiple modules see everything
stalled for months on.


Yes you got me, i was obviously advocating against all that. And the
truth must be that i, umm... hate JetBrains, and want to take IDEA away
from them? Yes, that must be it.

</sarcasm>

Seriously, i don't see how it could hurt JetBrains or IDEA if they made
the source available to customers, the same people who already are
contributing to IDEA by making plugins, and who obviously are interested
in making IDEA a better product.

Kreiger

It may not hurt, but it doesn't help and if it isn't helpful, why do it?

--
-


David H. McCoy


-


0

Dmitry Jemerov (JetBrains) wrote:

Hello Keith,

KL> I think for Javascript plugin to improve, Language API would have to
KL> improve

That is not true. The new functionality of JavaScript added in version
5.1 was implemented without any changes to the Language API.


I didn't know. I guess the JS support seems pretty complete given the
current API, though, at least now in 5.1/demetra.

0

Please sign in to leave a comment.