Notice: this Wiki will be going read only early in 2024 and edits will no longer be possible. Please see: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/helpdesk/-/wikis/Wiki-shutdown-plan for the plan.
Difference between revisions of "Talk:JDT Core Programmer Guide/MetaIndex"
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
"Extract package names from all none * imports" - why treat wildcard imports differently? They, too, contain the full package part of each qualified name. --[[User:Stephan.herrmann.berlin.de|Stephan.herrmann.berlin.de]] ([[User talk:Stephan.herrmann.berlin.de|talk]]) 16:18, 29 March 2021 (EDT) | "Extract package names from all none * imports" - why treat wildcard imports differently? They, too, contain the full package part of each qualified name. --[[User:Stephan.herrmann.berlin.de|Stephan.herrmann.berlin.de]] ([[User talk:Stephan.herrmann.berlin.de|talk]]) 16:18, 29 March 2021 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | "There are discussions at {{Bug|570078}} if we should extend this MetaIndex for other kind of search patterns as well." - I was very naively assuming that the same mechanism would transparently apply for all index searches involving type names. Why / how / where would different search patterns require different approaches? --[[User:Stephan.herrmann.berlin.de|Stephan.herrmann.berlin.de]] ([[User talk:Stephan.herrmann.berlin.de|talk]]) 16:24, 29 March 2021 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 16:24, 29 March 2021
Where you discuss "capturing of package names are done in BinaryIndexes" you list a few locations, where type references are found, but the implementation doesn't actually care. It simply reads all entries of the constant pool. Otherwise we would be missing a lot of type references! I believe the implementation more than the description :) or am I missing anything? --Stephan.herrmann.berlin.de (talk) 16:15, 29 March 2021 (EDT)
"Extract package names from all none * imports" - why treat wildcard imports differently? They, too, contain the full package part of each qualified name. --Stephan.herrmann.berlin.de (talk) 16:18, 29 March 2021 (EDT)
"There are discussions at bug 570078 if we should extend this MetaIndex for other kind of search patterns as well." - I was very naively assuming that the same mechanism would transparently apply for all index searches involving type names. Why / how / where would different search patterns require different approaches? --Stephan.herrmann.berlin.de (talk) 16:24, 29 March 2021 (EDT)