CodeBrowser: Different tree presentations
Submitted by Thursday, 28 September, 2006 - 21:47
on
Hi,
I'd like to add the following features to the CodeBrowser plugin:
1. An option to show tags with their namespace (i.e. classes, structs, ...) instead of the plain tag names - useful mostly for OO languages (C++, Java, ...). For example, if a file "a.cpp" contains functions "void A:f()" and "void B:f()", you will see "A:f()" and "B:f()" in the tree instead of two undistinguishable "f()" nodes. What do you think?
One of the questions regarding this feature is what to do with the right-click menu operations: Insert, Hypersearch, Copy, ... when the namespace option is used. Should these work on the namespace-qualified tag or continue to work on the plain tag name?
2. An option to have the tags grouped under their namespace, instead of under their tag type ("Function", "Variable", "Class", .. ), and an icon for each tag that specifies its type. Such a presentation of the tree would make it look more or less like the "Outline" view in eclipse. I think such a presentation may be more useful than the current.
At a later stage, the CodeBrowser tree can become completely customizable using an XML configuration file that will map "ctags" information into tree node strings and icons.
Please tell me what you think.
Thanks,
Shlomy
I'd like to add the following features to the CodeBrowser plugin:
1. An option to show tags with their namespace (i.e. classes, structs, ...) instead of the plain tag names - useful mostly for OO languages (C++, Java, ...). For example, if a file "a.cpp" contains functions "void A:f()" and "void B:f()", you will see "A:f()" and "B:f()" in the tree instead of two undistinguishable "f()" nodes. What do you think?
One of the questions regarding this feature is what to do with the right-click menu operations: Insert, Hypersearch, Copy, ... when the namespace option is used. Should these work on the namespace-qualified tag or continue to work on the plain tag name?
2. An option to have the tags grouped under their namespace, instead of under their tag type ("Function", "Variable", "Class", .. ), and an icon for each tag that specifies its type. Such a presentation of the tree would make it look more or less like the "Outline" view in eclipse. I think such a presentation may be more useful than the current.
At a later stage, the CodeBrowser tree can become completely customizable using an XML configuration file that will map "ctags" information into tree node strings and icons.
Please tell me what you think.
Thanks,
Shlomy