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.
I have function my_function declared in file functions.phpo which is required in file index.php where I call my_function. If I ctrl+click on function name NB does not open functions.phpo file. I have already added .phpo extension in tools/options/miscellaneous/files and associated it with php MIME type. If I rename functions.phpo into functions.php everything works fine. Thanks for helping. Regards, Davide. Ps: form topic link: http://forums.netbeans.org/viewtopic.php?p=164867
(In reply to boedociclon from comment #0) > I have already added .phpo extension in tools/options/miscellaneous/files > and associated it with php MIME type. Please try to restart IDE. Thanks.
Still doesn't work. Now NB lists in Navigator all classes, functions, properties etc. declared inside a .phpo/.phph file; but when I command+click / command+hover on functions names used in another file NB doesn't tell me where the declaration is.
Created attachment 155071 [details] screenshot (In reply to boedociclon from comment #2) > but when I command+click / command+hover on > functions names used in another file NB doesn't tell me where the > declaration is. I cannot reproduce that... One idea: Please try to remove your user directory(and cache?) of NetBeans (You can get the path in the Help > About dialog). Then, try to set mime-type again. *NOTE* All your configurations, plugins, e.t.c. are initialized. Thanks.
Finally it works! I deleted cache (on Mac: ~/Library/Caches/NetBeans/${netbeans_version}/) and restarted NB Thank you so much! My best regards.
I'm glad to hear that :)
Tomas, what's a correct status in this case? Thanks.
(In reply to junichi11 from comment #6) > Tomas, what's a correct status in this case? > > Thanks. WORKSFORME because it worked for you without any changes in the code and it was a relevant issue (otherwise it would be INVALID). Thanks.
(In reply to Tomas Mysik from comment #7) > WORKSFORME because it worked for you without any changes in the code and it > was a relevant issue (otherwise it would be INVALID). Make sense. Thanks!