ReSharper takes away VS.NET2003's Tab for interface stubs

If I run Resharper (v67) I no longer get VS' support for creating my
interface stubs by pressing tab after selecting an interface to implement.

In general ReSharper takes over too much from VS - take a lesson from
QuickCode and Xtreme Simplicity. If only those tools had better feature
sets...


32 comments
Comment actions Permalink

Oskar,

Actually it doesn't take this useful feature from VS.NET - I
successfully use this feature with ReSharper. In contrary, we are going to
have specifal shortcuts for implementing interface members (which is, as I
see it, better because you need some jiggery-pokery to implement a newly
added interface member).

But I definitely want to ask you which Visual Studio .NET features you
miss when using ReSharper?
--
Oleg Stepanov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

"Oskar Austegard" <oskara@mominc.com.nospam> wrote in message
news:c1vsab$o5v$1@is.intellij.net...

If I run Resharper (v67) I no longer get VS' support for creating my
interface stubs by pressing tab after selecting an interface to implement.

>

In general ReSharper takes over too much from VS - take a lesson from
QuickCode and Xtreme Simplicity. If only those tools had better feature
sets...

>
>


0
Comment actions Permalink

On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 20:48:11 +0300, "Oleg Stepanov \(JetBrains\)"
<Oleg.Stepanov@JetBrains.Com> wrote:

Hi,

But I definitely want to ask you which Visual Studio .NET features you

>miss when using ReSharper?

The Xml Comments auto-completion doesn't seem to work any more. I also
still miss just pressing space after typing new to get the drop-down.
Sometimes I don't want to add a using reference for the class and the
ctrl-shift-space method always adds one.

thanks,

Simon.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Simon,

Thank you for the feedback. I will comment consequently on each issue:

1) We will either add XML comment support or let VS.NET completion work
in these cases
2) We will add some kind of completion autopopup after new in M2
3) Could you describe a case where you really don't need automatic using
insertion? What would you prefer insted in these cases?

--
Oleg Stepanov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"
"Simon Steele" <ssnews@softel.co.uk> wrote in message
news:tkp8409tfmfcrdtb8tb3dok47ktde4f06s@4ax.com...

On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 20:48:11 +0300, "Oleg Stepanov \(JetBrains\)"
<Oleg.Stepanov@JetBrains.Com> wrote:

>

Hi,

>

But I definitely want to ask you which Visual Studio .NET features

you

>miss when using ReSharper?

>

The Xml Comments auto-completion doesn't seem to work any more. I also
still miss just pressing space after typing new to get the drop-down.
Sometimes I don't want to add a using reference for the class and the
ctrl-shift-space method always adds one.

>

thanks,

>

Simon.



0
Comment actions Permalink

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 14:02:09 +0300, "Oleg Stepanov \(JetBrains\)"
<Oleg.Stepanov@JetBrains.Com> wrote:

>Simon,
>

Thank you for the feedback. I will comment consequently on each issue:

>

1) We will either add XML comment support or let VS.NET completion work

>in these cases

2) We will add some kind of completion autopopup after new in M2


Excellent news, thanks.

3) Could you describe a case where you really don't need automatic using

>insertion? What would you prefer insted in these cases?

For example, where I have two assemblies that look like this:

Assembly1 Types:
MyClass
OtherClass

Assembly2 Types:
MyClass
SomeOtherClass

if both are imported, then any use of MyClass is ambiguous. If only
one is imported then I can happily import one of the assemblies
without qualifying every use of MyClass, but can still use the types
from both.

Does that make sense?

thanks,

Simon.

0
Comment actions Permalink

if both are imported, then any use of MyClass is ambiguous. If only
one is imported then I can happily import one of the assemblies
without qualifying every use of MyClass, but can still use the types
from both.

>

Does that make sense?


ReSharper usings insertion is quite smart to find such conflicting names. To
resolve them it either insert an alias or use the qualified name. Can you
provide a usecase when this functionality does not work or works
inconveniently for you?

--
Valentin Kipiatkov
Chief Scientist, Vice President of Product Development
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


"Simon Steele" <ssnews@softel.co.uk> wrote in message
news:kjr840lphf63h0gl8d5h3grfanqcr6uu51@4ax.com...

On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 14:02:09 +0300, "Oleg Stepanov \(JetBrains\)"
<Oleg.Stepanov@JetBrains.Com> wrote:

>

>Simon,
>

Thank you for the feedback. I will comment consequently on each

issue:

>

1) We will either add XML comment support or let VS.NET completion

work

>in these cases

2) We will add some kind of completion autopopup after new in M2

>

Excellent news, thanks.

>

3) Could you describe a case where you really don't need automatic

using

>insertion? What would you prefer insted in these cases?

>

For example, where I have two assemblies that look like this:

>

Assembly1 Types:
MyClass
OtherClass

>

Assembly2 Types:
MyClass
SomeOtherClass

>

if both are imported, then any use of MyClass is ambiguous. If only
one is imported then I can happily import one of the assemblies
without qualifying every use of MyClass, but can still use the types
from both.

>

Does that make sense?

>

thanks,

>

Simon.



0
Comment actions Permalink

There is one I particularly miss: CTRL-U to change to case! (CTRL-SHIFT-U
still works for reverse operation)

-Michael


"Oleg Stepanov (JetBrains)" <Oleg.Stepanov@JetBrains.Com> wrote in message
news:c1vt0s$sag$1@is.intellij.net...

Oskar,

>

Actually it doesn't take this useful feature from VS.NET - I
successfully use this feature with ReSharper. In contrary, we are going to
have specifal shortcuts for implementing interface members (which is, as I
see it, better because you need some jiggery-pokery to implement a newly
added interface member).

>

But I definitely want to ask you which Visual Studio .NET features you
miss when using ReSharper?
--
Oleg Stepanov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

>

"Oskar Austegard" <oskara@mominc.com.nospam> wrote in message
news:c1vsab$o5v$1@is.intellij.net...

If I run Resharper (v67) I no longer get VS' support for creating my
interface stubs by pressing tab after selecting an interface to

implement.

>

In general ReSharper takes over too much from VS - take a lesson from
QuickCode and Xtreme Simplicity. If only those tools had better feature
sets...

>
>

>
>


0
Comment actions Permalink

Michael,

You can change the mapping for VS.NET actions. Map the keys as you like.

--
Oleg Stepanov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"
"Michael Teper" <michael.dot.teper@convade.dot.com> wrote in message
news:c22fkc$7j1$1@is.intellij.net...

There is one I particularly miss: CTRL-U to change to case! (CTRL-SHIFT-U
still works for reverse operation)

>

-Michael

>
>

"Oleg Stepanov (JetBrains)" <Oleg.Stepanov@JetBrains.Com> wrote in message
news:c1vt0s$sag$1@is.intellij.net...

Oskar,

>

Actually it doesn't take this useful feature from VS.NET - I
successfully use this feature with ReSharper. In contrary, we are going

to

have specifal shortcuts for implementing interface members (which is, as

I

see it, better because you need some jiggery-pokery to implement a newly
added interface member).

>

But I definitely want to ask you which Visual Studio .NET features

you

miss when using ReSharper?
--
Oleg Stepanov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

>

"Oskar Austegard" <oskara@mominc.com.nospam> wrote in message
news:c1vsab$o5v$1@is.intellij.net...

If I run Resharper (v67) I no longer get VS' support for creating my
interface stubs by pressing tab after selecting an interface to

implement.

>

In general ReSharper takes over too much from VS - take a lesson from
QuickCode and Xtreme Simplicity. If only those tools had better

feature

sets...

>
>

>
>

>
>


0
Comment actions Permalink

How do you get it to work?! The tab key no longer implements the interface
stubs on my system. I'm running v70 with VS.NET 2003.

Thanks,
Derek

"Oleg Stepanov (JetBrains)" <Oleg.Stepanov@JetBrains.Com> wrote in message
news:c1vt0s$sag$1@is.intellij.net...

Oskar,

>

Actually it doesn't take this useful feature from VS.NET - I
successfully use this feature with ReSharper. In contrary, we are going to
have specifal shortcuts for implementing interface members (which is, as I
see it, better because you need some jiggery-pokery to implement a newly
added interface member).

>

But I definitely want to ask you which Visual Studio .NET features you
miss when using ReSharper?
--
Oleg Stepanov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

>

"Oskar Austegard" <oskara@mominc.com.nospam> wrote in message
news:c1vsab$o5v$1@is.intellij.net...

If I run Resharper (v67) I no longer get VS' support for creating my
interface stubs by pressing tab after selecting an interface to

implement.

>

In general ReSharper takes over too much from VS - take a lesson from
QuickCode and Xtreme Simplicity. If only those tools had better feature
sets...

>
>

>
>


0
Comment actions Permalink

Hello Derek,

How do you get it to work?! The tab key no longer implements the
interface stubs on my system. I'm running v70 with VS.NET 2003.


I sometimes have a tough time getting the tab to work properly, even when not using Resharper. The trick I've found is that you get the tooltip directly after typing the interface name.

If it still refuses to work, I end up redoing the class declaration from the : forward.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Derek, Matt

There's another way in VS.NET to implement interface: find the class in the
Class Browser, find the interface you want to implement in the Base Classes
and choosr Add -> Interface members...

ReSharper will provide better functionality for this soon: you will be able
to implement members of interface (as well as override members) with a
single keypress.

--
Oleg Stepanov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"
"Matt Berther" <mberther@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c25llv$s0h$1@is.intellij.net...

Hello Derek,

>

How do you get it to work?! The tab key no longer implements the
interface stubs on my system. I'm running v70 with VS.NET 2003.

>

>

I sometimes have a tough time getting the tab to work properly, even when

not using Resharper. The trick I've found is that you get the tooltip
directly after typing the interface name.
>

If it still refuses to work, I end up redoing the class declaration from

the : forward.
>


0
Comment actions Permalink

Hello Oleg,

Derek, Matt

ReSharper will provide better functionality for this soon: you will be
able to implement members of interface (as well as override members)
with a single keypress.


I was aware of this other way too, but quite honestly, Im hoping for IDEA like functionality (CTRL-I and CTRL-O). This just makes life too easy. :=)

0
Comment actions Permalink

Matt,

Sure, this functionality will come with ReSharper.

--
Oleg Stepanov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"
"Matt Berther" <mberther@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c285af$a3v$1@is.intellij.net...

Hello Oleg,

>

Derek, Matt

>

ReSharper will provide better functionality for this soon: you will be
able to implement members of interface (as well as override members)
with a single keypress.

>

>

I was aware of this other way too, but quite honestly, Im hoping for IDEA

like functionality (CTRL-I and CTRL-O). This just makes life too easy. :=)
>


0
Comment actions Permalink

OK - I'm now running Build 72 and I like ReSharper better. But I still can't figure out how to get the Tab to add the interface stubs.

When are you expecting to have the special shortcuts you mention below?

Second: Why does "MyNamespace." + Tab produce an intellisense list listing every C# keyword and not just the sub-namespaces as VS does?


Thanks,
Oskar

0
Comment actions Permalink

Hi,

Second: Why does "MyNamespace." + Tab produce an intellisense list listing

every C# keyword and not just the sub-namespaces as VS does?

Because of the bug in build 72 :)
This is fixed in build 73 which will be available shortly.

---
Eugene Pasynkov
Developer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


0
Comment actions Permalink

Oskar,

Regarding the "Tab" question -- we plan to introduce CtrlI and CtrlO
shortcuts which will let you to easily implement or override a member from
base class/interface. This seems to be more usable - even MSFTers confirm
that their current scheme with Tab is not very usable.

Though, if you have any ideas for better implementation - we are open to
suggestions.

--
Oleg Stepanov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"
"Oskar Austegard" <no_mail@jetbrains.com> wrote in message
news:15117999.1079564994655.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

OK - I'm now running Build 72 and I like ReSharper better. But I still

can't figure out how to get the Tab to add the interface stubs.
>

When are you expecting to have the special shortcuts you mention below?

>

Second: Why does "MyNamespace." + Tab produce an intellisense list listing

every C# keyword and not just the sub-namespaces as VS does?
>
>

Thanks,
Oskar



0
Comment actions Permalink

Please choose some other shortcuts, since I use Ctrl+I (Incremental Search)
and Ctrl+O (Open File) heavily.

-Thomas

"Oleg Stepanov (JetBrains)" <Oleg.Stepanov@JetBrains.Com> wrote in message
news:c3bqg3$cd0$1@is.intellij.net...

Oskar,

>

Regarding the "Tab" question -- we plan to introduce CtrlI and CtrlO
shortcuts which will let you to easily implement or override a member from
base class/interface. This seems to be more usable - even MSFTers confirm
that their current scheme with Tab is not very usable.

>

Though, if you have any ideas for better implementation - we are open

to

suggestions.

>

--
Oleg Stepanov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"
"Oskar Austegard" <no_mail@jetbrains.com> wrote in message
news:15117999.1079564994655.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

OK - I'm now running Build 72 and I like ReSharper better. But I still

can't figure out how to get the Tab to add the interface stubs.
>

When are you expecting to have the special shortcuts you mention below?

>

Second: Why does "MyNamespace." + Tab produce an intellisense list

listing

every C# keyword and not just the sub-namespaces as VS does?
>
>

Thanks,
Oskar

>
>


0
Comment actions Permalink

We've just decided to put "Implement Members" and "Override Members" into
popup shown by Alt-Insert.

--
Valentin Kipiatkov
Chief Scientist, Vice President of Product Development
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

"Thomas Freudenberg" <jetbrains@thomasfreudenberg.com> wrote in message
news:c3bv7t$71l$1@is.intellij.net...

Please choose some other shortcuts, since I use Ctrl+I (Incremental

Search)

and Ctrl+O (Open File) heavily.

>

-Thomas

>

"Oleg Stepanov (JetBrains)" <Oleg.Stepanov@JetBrains.Com> wrote in message
news:c3bqg3$cd0$1@is.intellij.net...

Oskar,

>

Regarding the "Tab" question -- we plan to introduce Ctrl+I and

Ctrl+O

shortcuts which will let you to easily implement or override a member

from

base class/interface. This seems to be more usable - even MSFTers

confirm

that their current scheme with Tab is not very usable.

>

Though, if you have any ideas for better implementation - we are

open

to

suggestions.

>

--
Oleg Stepanov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"
"Oskar Austegard" <no_mail@jetbrains.com> wrote in message
news:15117999.1079564994655.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

OK - I'm now running Build 72 and I like ReSharper better. But I

still

can't figure out how to get the Tab to add the interface stubs.
>

When are you expecting to have the special shortcuts you mention

below?

>

Second: Why does "MyNamespace." + Tab produce an intellisense list

listing

every C# keyword and not just the sub-namespaces as VS does?
>
>

Thanks,
Oskar

>
>

>
>


0
Comment actions Permalink

Yes, VS Tab implementation is decidedly marginal at best. Will the Alt+Insert be intelligent enough to only include missing interface members?

Another feature that would be great would be if you make a change to an interface, to hae the option to go out and update every class that implements the interface - early on in development this is something that happens fairly frequently.

Thanks,
Oskar

0
Comment actions Permalink

Oscar,

1) Yes, it definitely will
2) It will depend on the changes you perform in the interface. When you
rename or change signature or something like that it is the refactoring
business to keep eye on all implementations. We will also have refactoring
for sefely deleting a member. And for adding new members an intention will
be implemented to suggest you to implement the new member in all interface
implementations. But I'm not sure when this functionality will be ready.

--
Oleg Stepanov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"
"Oskar Austegard" <no_mail@jetbrains.com> wrote in message
news:14270811.1079619342775.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

Yes, VS Tab implementation is decidedly marginal at best. Will the

Alt+Insert be intelligent enough to only include missing interface members?
>

Another feature that would be great would be if you make a change to an

interface, to hae the option to go out and update every class that
implements the interface - early on in development this is something that
happens fairly frequently.
>

Thanks,
Oskar



0
Comment actions Permalink

And for adding new members an intention will
be implemented to suggest you to implement the new member in all interface
implementations.


I think that you rarely want to implement member in all implementations at
once (because you probably wish to write some meaningful code there, not to
leave them blank). So the intention will allow you to choose an
implementation class, create member implementation there and jump there to
allow you to insert the code.

--
Valentin Kipiatkov
Chief Scientist, Vice President of Product Development
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


"Oleg Stepanov (JetBrains)" <Oleg.Stepanov@JetBrains.Com> wrote in message
news:c3cb6l$gus$1@is.intellij.net...

Oscar,

>

1) Yes, it definitely will
2) It will depend on the changes you perform in the interface. When

you

rename or change signature or something like that it is the refactoring
business to keep eye on all implementations. We will also have refactoring
for sefely deleting a member. And for adding new members an intention will
be implemented to suggest you to implement the new member in all interface
implementations. But I'm not sure when this functionality will be ready.

>

--
Oleg Stepanov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"
"Oskar Austegard" <no_mail@jetbrains.com> wrote in message
news:14270811.1079619342775.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

Yes, VS Tab implementation is decidedly marginal at best. Will the

Alt+Insert be intelligent enough to only include missing interface

members?

>

Another feature that would be great would be if you make a change to an

interface, to hae the option to go out and update every class that
implements the interface - early on in development this is something that
happens fairly frequently.
>

Thanks,
Oskar

>
>


0
Comment actions Permalink

I disagree. In order for the solution to compile, once you add the member to your interface, all implementing classes must implement the new member as well. Therefore the refactoring option should add the implementation members to all the classes at once - Resharper should NOT leave you with code that won't compile.

What would be nice would be if after adding the members, the Find Instances window would pop up for the new member allowing you to use it as a tasklist for adding meaningful code to your implementation members.

Oskar

0
Comment actions Permalink

I agree. We should allow adding mock implementations to all places somehow
easily. I forsee hordes of TDD fans demanding this feature ;)

--
Oleg Stepanov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"
"Oskar Austegard" <no_mail@jetbrains.com> wrote in message
news:21747195.1079633810021.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

I disagree. In order for the solution to compile, once you add the member

to your interface, all implementing classes must implement the new member as
well. Therefore the refactoring option should add the implementation
members to all the classes at once - Resharper should NOT leave you with
code that won't compile.
>

What would be nice would be if after adding the members, the Find

Instances window would pop up for the new member allowing you to use it as a
tasklist for adding meaningful code to your implementation members.
>

Oskar



0
Comment actions Permalink

I think it depends on your personal style of work. I personally would rarely
implement all members at once because I hate to forget to insert real
implementation into some of them and get unimplemented methods in production
code. Non-compilable code effectively protects me from this :-).

--
Valentin Kipiatkov
Chief Scientist, Vice President of Product Development
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

"Oskar Austegard" <no_mail@jetbrains.com> wrote in message
news:21747195.1079633810021.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

I disagree. In order for the solution to compile, once you add the member

to your interface, all implementing classes must implement the new member as
well. Therefore the refactoring option should add the implementation
members to all the classes at once - Resharper should NOT leave you with
code that won't compile.
>

What would be nice would be if after adding the members, the Find

Instances window would pop up for the new member allowing you to use it as a
tasklist for adding meaningful code to your implementation members.
>

Oskar



0
Comment actions Permalink

Another objection against implementing it in all implementation classes is
the following. Imagine that you have interface I which is implemented by
abstract class A and which in turn is implemented by B and C. When I choose
to implement method from I in all classes, should it implement it in A or in
B and C (inserting abstract method into A since C# requires that)?

--
Valentin Kipiatkov
Chief Scientist, Vice President of Product Development
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

"Oleg Stepanov (JetBrains)" <Oleg.Stepanov@JetBrains.Com> wrote in message
news:c3cq5j$du9$1@is.intellij.net...

I agree. We should allow adding mock implementations to all places somehow
easily. I forsee hordes of TDD fans demanding this feature ;)

>

--
Oleg Stepanov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"
"Oskar Austegard" <no_mail@jetbrains.com> wrote in message
news:21747195.1079633810021.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

I disagree. In order for the solution to compile, once you add the

member

to your interface, all implementing classes must implement the new member

as

well. Therefore the refactoring option should add the implementation
members to all the classes at once - Resharper should NOT leave you with
code that won't compile.
>

What would be nice would be if after adding the members, the Find

Instances window would pop up for the new member allowing you to use it as

a

tasklist for adding meaningful code to your implementation members.
>

Oskar

>
>


0
Comment actions Permalink

Ok - how about having the OPTION to implement it everywhere? That would satisfy both of us, right?

Thanks,
Oskar

0
Comment actions Permalink

The problem with leaving unimplemented members is partially solved by
inserting
special marks into stub implementations (like TODOs). All you then need is
to pay some
attention to such marks in your project.

"Valentin Kipiatkov (JetBrains)" <valentin@intellij.com> wrote in message
news:c3csdb$rhe$1@is.intellij.net...

I think it depends on your personal style of work. I personally would

rarely

implement all members at once because I hate to forget to insert real
implementation into some of them and get unimplemented methods in

production

code. Non-compilable code effectively protects me from this :).

>

--
Valentin Kipiatkov
Chief Scientist, Vice President of Product Development
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

>

"Oskar Austegard" <no_mail@jetbrains.com> wrote in message
news:21747195.1079633810021.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

I disagree. In order for the solution to compile, once you add the

member

to your interface, all implementing classes must implement the new member

as

well. Therefore the refactoring option should add the implementation
members to all the classes at once - Resharper should NOT leave you with
code that won't compile.
>

What would be nice would be if after adding the members, the Find

Instances window would pop up for the new member allowing you to use it as

a

tasklist for adding meaningful code to your implementation members.
>

Oskar

>
>


0
Comment actions Permalink

Ok - how about having the OPTION to implement it everywhere? That would

satisfy both of us, right?

Yes, of course. But what should it do in the case described above (with I,
A, B and C)?

--
Valentin Kipiatkov
Chief Scientist, Vice President of Product Development
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


"Oskar Austegard" <no_mail@jetbrains.com> wrote in message
news:28598656.1079640965226.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

Ok - how about having the OPTION to implement it everywhere? That would

satisfy both of us, right?
>

Thanks,
Oskar



0
Comment actions Permalink

I think there should be the following choices:

===============
Iimplement in:
-


A
B
C
-


Mock implementation
===============

The first three implement in only one class (and insert abstract method in A
and override it where appropriate). The last item is "safe": it makes the
less changes possible to satisfy the compiler. It inserts abstract
implementation to A, overrides it in B and C and inserts mock code to
implementations in B and C (return dummy value, insert TODO or throw
NotImplementedException()).

--
Oleg Stepanov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"
"Valentin Kipiatkov (JetBrains)" <valentin@intellij.com> wrote in message
news:c3eorh$12t$1@is.intellij.net...

Ok - how about having the OPTION to implement it everywhere? That would

satisfy both of us, right?

>

Yes, of course. But what should it do in the case described above (with I,
A, B and C)?

>

--
Valentin Kipiatkov
Chief Scientist, Vice President of Product Development
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

>
>

"Oskar Austegard" <no_mail@jetbrains.com> wrote in message
news:28598656.1079640965226.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

Ok - how about having the OPTION to implement it everywhere? That would

satisfy both of us, right?
>

Thanks,
Oskar

>
>


0
Comment actions Permalink

I'd be fine with that, assuming the special marks provide a simplified way to create the stub when it comes time to implement the interface member.

Thanks for all the attention you are giving this topic - you're obviously giving it a lot more thought than MS did.

Oskar

0
Comment actions Permalink

On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 20:48:11 +0300, "Oleg Stepanov \(JetBrains\)"
<Oleg.Stepanov@JetBrains.Com> wrote:

But I definitely want to ask you which Visual Studio .NET features you
miss when using ReSharper?


Hi,

Another one I've just noticed.

When I type:

somemember.OnSomeEvent

and then press space, I still get the "press Tab to insert" bit for
the delegate name and member name, but I used to be able to press tab
again to insert the delegate function with either the suggested name
or a new one that I type. I really like that feature. Instead, the
text between the brackets just seems to be replaced with a tab.

Hoping you can fix that,

Simon.

0

Please sign in to leave a comment.