Accessor creation for multiple ivars

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Accessor creation for multiple ivars

Torsten Bergmann
When creating a class with three or more instance variables

Object subclass: #Foo
        instanceVariableNames: 'one two three'
        classVariableNames: ''
        category: 'Bar'

and choosing "Refactoring" -> "Inst var Recfactoring" -> "Accessors"
from the class in Nautilus one can only select a single ivar to
generate the accessor methods.

Accessor creation can only be done one by one - which is a time killer
when you have multiple ivars.

Is this by intention or a bug? Maybe there is another way to generate them
that I miss?

Thx
T.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Accessor creation for multiple ivars

philippeback

I share your pain.

Le 15 juil. 2015 12:16, "Torsten Bergmann" <[hidden email]> a écrit :
When creating a class with three or more instance variables

Object subclass: #Foo
        instanceVariableNames: 'one two three'
        classVariableNames: ''
        category: 'Bar'

and choosing "Refactoring" -> "Inst var Recfactoring" -> "Accessors"
from the class in Nautilus one can only select a single ivar to
generate the accessor methods.

Accessor creation can only be done one by one - which is a time killer
when you have multiple ivars.

Is this by intention or a bug? Maybe there is another way to generate them
that I miss?

Thx
T.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Accessor creation for multiple ivars

Nicolai Hess
In reply to this post by Torsten Bergmann


2015-07-15 12:16 GMT+02:00 Torsten Bergmann <[hidden email]>:
When creating a class with three or more instance variables

Object subclass: #Foo
        instanceVariableNames: 'one two three'
        classVariableNames: ''
        category: 'Bar'

and choosing "Refactoring" -> "Inst var Recfactoring" -> "Accessors"
from the class in Nautilus one can only select a single ivar to
generate the accessor methods.

Accessor creation can only be done one by one - which is a time killer
when you have multiple ivars.

Is this by intention or a bug? Maybe there is another way to generate them
that I miss?

Thx
T.



choosing "Refactoring" -> "Class Refactoring" -> "Generate Accessors"


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Accessor creation for multiple ivars

Torsten Bergmann
Nicolai Hess wrote
>choosing "Refactoring" -> "Class Refactoring" -> "Generate Accessors"

Aaarghh ... that was just too easy. Nonetheless it is confusing that
both have the same result but different way of doing it. Any usability
engineers among us?


Phile wrote:
>I share your pain.

At least I was not the only one who did not see the other menu ;)

Thx
T.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Accessor creation for multiple ivars

philippeback
Worst is that I got to that menu at one point but completely forgot about it..

The refactoring menu + code rewriting features are in need of some love :-)

Phil

On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Torsten Bergmann <[hidden email]> wrote:
Nicolai Hess wrote
>choosing "Refactoring" -> "Class Refactoring" -> "Generate Accessors"

Aaarghh ... that was just too easy. Nonetheless it is confusing that
both have the same result but different way of doing it. Any usability
engineers among us?


Phile wrote:
>I share your pain.

At least I was not the only one who did not see the other menu ;)

Thx
T.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Accessor creation for multiple ivars

EstebanLM
cmd+h+a :)

but yes, we need to improve those menus.

Esteban

On 15 Jul 2015, at 13:19, [hidden email] wrote:

Worst is that I got to that menu at one point but completely forgot about it..

The refactoring menu + code rewriting features are in need of some love :-)

Phil

On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Torsten Bergmann <[hidden email]> wrote:
Nicolai Hess wrote
>choosing "Refactoring" -> "Class Refactoring" -> "Generate Accessors"

Aaarghh ... that was just too easy. Nonetheless it is confusing that
both have the same result but different way of doing it. Any usability
engineers among us?


Phile wrote:
>I share your pain.

At least I was not the only one who did not see the other menu ;)

Thx
T.