Skip to content

Fixed Issue #1, Duplicate Code for t and vr.#4

Open
jayharris wants to merge 1 commit intoJetBrains:masterfrom
jayharris:master
Open

Fixed Issue #1, Duplicate Code for t and vr.#4
jayharris wants to merge 1 commit intoJetBrains:masterfrom
jayharris:master

Conversation

@jayharris
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Fixed the issue with vr templates replicating, rather than getting the type definitions.
Moved the t templates to a new UntypedMemberTemplates group, as the test templates will not be appended with type definitions. Also, renamed the template from t to tm (Test Method) to allow for future test fixture, setup, and teardown templates.

Did not regenerate the Download files.

…n new UntypedMemberTemplates group. Group can be used for future expansion on members that do not get type definitions.
@angularsen
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Does this fix the following bug?

vrb generates

private readonly type fieldname;

instead of

private readonly bool fieldname;

@jayharris
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Yes. Any of the vr* templates will render the proper type value instead of type.

It also renames the t mnemonic for test methods to tm so that additional test-based mnemonics can be added.

@jayharris
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

This addresses #1 and is the beginning of correcting #5

@angularsen
Copy link
Copy Markdown

I recently discovered that nb and ob also exists that are somewhat overlapping.

private bool fieldname = false;
private readonly bool fieldname = false;

Do we need both vr* and o* ?

I do miss some simple documentation that lists all the cases and what variations are supported for each, but that is a separate issue.

@angularsen
Copy link
Copy Markdown

I think "vb" and "vrb" for a field declarations with and without readonly modifier is intuitive, but "nb" and "ob" is not. Maybe adapting the same naming, such as "nb" and "nrb" for declarations with default value assignment, with/without readonly modifier?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants