setting source root to point inside of package hierarchy
I am sure this has been brought up already, but I looked in the archives and could not find an answer.
I am working with a huge code base, most of the code in which I do not want to load into Idea, just the package sub tree that I am currently working with. So in v 3.0.5 I was able to set the source root folder to point inside of pacakge tree (e.g. c:\src\com\mycompany\foo\bar).
However, when I try doing a similar thing in build 915 (and previous builds), Idea cannot resolve references to other classes, not even the ones in the same package. I've tried:
1. content folder = c:\src
source folder = com\mycompany\foo\bar
2. content folder = c:\src\com\mycompany\foo\bar
source folder = .
neither of which worked.
Can anyone suggest a workaround (or am I just misusing the feature)?
- Alex
请先登录再写评论。
I also miss that feature A LOT.
And suggestions like "you can easily copy the files
you need somewhere else" don't help.
I need the files where they are (to be updated by VCS,
check them out, add or remove various different packages).
Is there a chance to get it back? With the new modules
implementation, perhaps?
r.
Alex Khesin wrote:
By definition a "source root" in IDEA is a directory that has your top-level
packages (such as "com") as immediate parents. In a new structure a source
root should be under a content root or the same as its content root. So for
your configuration correct setup would be
Content root: C:\src
Source root C:\src
If you don't want IDEA to look into some directories under the content root,
you can exclude them from the content (just mark them as 'excluded').
--
Best regards,
Eugene Zhuravlev
JetBrains Inc., http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"
"Alex Khesin" <no_mail@jetbrains.com> wrote in message
news:1318355.1062704154941.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...
and could not find an answer.
>
want to load into Idea, just the package sub tree that I am currently
working with. So in v 3.0.5 I was able to set the source root folder to
point inside of pacakge tree (e.g. c:\src\com\mycompany\foo\bar).
>
builds), Idea cannot resolve references to other classes, not even the ones
in the same package. I've tried:
>
>
>
>
Eugene, is there a design (not implementation) reason for not allowing
to have a content root (which files to consider) UNDER a top root
(just a pointer where the top package starts).
Or equivalently, if source root would have to be under content root,
I strongly suggest to be able this not to be the "top package" directory
(for example specifying a package that this directory corresponds to).
If you have a complex package tree, and have to do some heavy experimenting with
just one package at level 4-5 it is extremely inconvenient to exclude
all parallel packages along the used one.
Richard Nemec
Eugene Zhuravlev wrote:
> Can anyone suggest a workaround (or am I just misusing the feature)?
Restructure your project (I'm serious). This will solve more problems
than this one.
Tom
Tom, if it were my project - no problem.
But some of us don't have that luxury.
Well - another "real world" situation.
r.
Thomas Singer wrote:
I certainly agree that projects should be structured that way, but unfortunately, some aren't. I'm working on a java project with a ~7 year history, so it's structure (among other things) is a little antique. For example, they don't have a source directory. They just put com in the project's root, along side lot of other stuff. So I have to set the source root to the project root, which ends up including lots of other non-java folders into the java source path.
This seems to slow things down a bit. It's not an option to exclude everything else, because those other directories have text files, xml files, and other stuff that I want to access and edit in idea. I know we need to clean up the project, but we're not at a place where we can do that right now (fixing this will be a bit of a political battle).
Anyway, I'm trying to say there are situations where specifying a "source location" which isn't necessarily the "source root" would be great.
> Tom, if it were my project - no problem.
> But some of us don't have that luxury.
> Well - another "real world" situation.
Well, our project (a geodetical desktop application) was really crappy
when my coworker and I got full control over it. Now, one year ago, it
is much better structured, has cool new features the customers like -
but there is still a long way to go. If we would not have started to
refactor/restructure the project, the project would be dead now.
Try to convince the project leaders to refactor/restructure your project
if something is wrong. I know, it's a very stony way, but it's worth the
trouble and often the only solution to preserve it from dying.
Tom
Yes, there were some reasons. We wished to make the project configuration
clearer to the users. That's the stuff which often caused misunderstanding.
--
Valentin Kipiatkov
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"
"Richard Nemec" <rndzank@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:bj8dk5$ali$1@is.intellij.net...
>
experimenting with
>
>
>
>
top-level
source
for
root,
>
Request filed as:
http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=15907
Please, comment and vote.
r.
Valentin Kipiatkov (JetBrains) wrote:
>>Eugene, is there a design (not implementation) reason for not allowing
>>to have a content root (which files to consider) UNDER a top root
>>(just a pointer where the top package starts).