This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.
| Summary: | NetBeans editor should have nested continuation indentation | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | editor | Reporter: | Michel Graciano <hmichel> |
| Component: | Formatting & Indentation | Assignee: | Dusan Balek <dbalek> |
| Status: | VERIFIED FIXED | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | janario, misterm, rodrigorsantos |
| Priority: | P3 | ||
| Version: | 7.3.1 | ||
| Hardware: | PC | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Issue Type: | DEFECT | Exception Reporter: | |
| Attachments: | Sample project | ||
Nested continuation indents have a couple of ugly corner cases. Consider the following line of code:
myInstance.methodFoo(arg1,arg2).methodBar(arg3);
It looks nice when newlines are placed in the following way:
myInstance
.methodFoo(
arg1,
arg2
)
.methodBar(
arg3
);
However, the problem is the determine the correct (and nice looking) indentation in the following case:
myInstance.methodFoo(
arg1,
arg2
)
.methodBar(
arg3
);
One possible ugly solution:
myInstance.methodFoo(
arg1,
arg2
)
.methodBar(
arg3
);
Another ugly solution:
myInstance.methodFoo(
arg1,
arg2
)
.methodBar(
arg3
);
What would you expect to be the correct indentation in this case?
(In reply to comment #1) Hi Dusan, the expected behaviour IMHO is the second one, always following the continuation pattern. I have talked with coworkers and they agree about it too. Fixed in jet-main. http://hg.netbeans.org/jet-main/rev/36b9b2a2ef53 Looks fine for me but as far as I can see, there is no option for it, right? v. Build 20130824-7d0441ae75ed |
Created attachment 136363 [details] Sample project For some scenarios, the continuation should be nested. Take a look at the sample below (I had to extend the text area at Chrome to see it correctly): final WebArchive war = ShrinkWrap .create(WebArchive.class, archiveName) .addPackages( true, //Arquillian ArquillianUtils.class.getPackage(), //Infra GenericsUtil.class.getPackage(), ApplicationContextHolder.class.getPackage(), ConnectionProvider.class.getPackage(), ResourcesFactory.class.getPackage(), //Abstracts AbstractEntity.class.getPackage(), AbstractService.class.getPackage(), EntityValidationException.class.getPackage(), //Testes com specs Specification.class.getPackage(), PessoaBasicSpec.class.getPackage()) .addAsResource("test-persistence.xml", "META-INF/persistence.xml") .addAsWebInfResource(EmptyAsset.INSTANCE, "beans.xml"); After addPackages it is better to see the nested parameters intended as the sample shows, but NB just ignore it and shows as: final WebArchive war = ShrinkWrap .create(WebArchive.class, archiveName) .addPackages( true, //Arquillian ArquillianUtils.class.getPackage(), //Infra GenericsUtil.class.getPackage(), ApplicationContextHolder.class.getPackage(), ConnectionProvider.class.getPackage(), ResourcesFactory.class.getPackage(), //Abstracts AbstractEntity.class.getPackage(), AbstractService.class.getPackage(), EntityValidationException.class.getPackage(), //Testes com specs Specification.class.getPackage(), PessoaBasicSpec.class.getPackage()) .addAsResource("test-persistence.xml", "META-INF/persistence.xml") .addAsWebInfResource(EmptyAsset.INSTANCE, "beans.xml"); For me it is a wrong behaviour. This kind of indentation should be nested, even if we have more levels. There is another behaviour that I think is wrong: log.log(Level.WARNING, "[{0}] {1}.", new Object[]{cv.getPropertyPath(). toString(), cv.getMessage()}); Why is it not considered a continuation and follow the size 8 I'd defined at the project configuration? It is using the indentation size instead continuation size, which is the correct behaviour here. I am attaching a sample project with some sample files. You can see the class nb.Class at lines 14, 19 and 32 where I have added some comments about the issues in each line.