|
I think that completion contribution as it
implemented through extension point is a more or less abstract tool.
But interface IFunctionSummary doesn't seem to be very C++-oriented
:-)).
I cannot say anything about standard way, just
couple of words about our implementation. We have a sort of tool
that parses doc.zip (and all supplementary files) and builds summary
file(s) which then code hovering implementation uses. This is an XML file with
blocs of this type:
<function
name="printf"
summary="Write formatted output to stdout"
synopsis="#include <stdio.h>\nint printf( const char * format, ...
);\n"
/>
Feel free to ask more if you need.
Alex Chapiro.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 3:22
PM
Subject: [cdt-dev] Code Assist
Questions
Hello all,
I'm still unable to get the current code
assist working for me. However, looking at its code I have some
questions:
- Does the current code
assist propose anything other than functions/function prototypes?
- Would the completion contribution through
extension points be able to propose anything other than global
functions?
- Would we need completion
contribution thorough extension points even if we parse and follow
includes?
- Do you know of a standard
way of linking documentation to code in C/C++ that could be used by the parser
to help in text hover?
Appreciate
your help,
Hoda Amer
Staff Software
Engineer
Rational Software - IBM Software
Group
| 