Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
| Summary: | Editors too simple, not smart enough | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Eclipse Project] Platform | Reporter: | Marcio <mqm> |
| Component: | Text | Assignee: | Platform-Text-Inbox <platform-text-inbox> |
| Status: | CLOSED WORKSFORME | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | enhancement | ||
| Priority: | P5 | CC: | mistria, nobody |
| Version: | 2.0 | ||
| Target Milestone: | 4.7 M4 | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
|
Description
Marcio
Another good one to look at is EditPlus - http://www.editplus.com New syntax highlighting can be defined with very simple TXT files (.STX). Many are available for download from their site, built by end users. Eclipse should have a similar feature, where syntax highlighting should be easy to add. If it were compatible with EditPlus, Eclipse would automatically be able to syntax highlight many different file formats. marcio How about close this bug? I was doing a search for something else and came across this bug. I think it's invalidated now... >I think it's invalidated now...
Why?
Currently no plans to provide this. Some of the suggested features are provided by WTP. Get rid of deprecated state. Very encouraging to see that 14 years ago, people were mentioning other tools as examples to follow, just like they mention Sublime, Atom or VSCode now; and in the end, Eclipse IDE is still there when other tools have vanished ;) That said, Eclipse IDE now has many extensions for many languages, several are shipped together with vanilla packages, many others can be easily discovered from marketplace, some of them do cover the exact request of this bug, and there have been improvement in Platform Text to keep improving support for new languages (bug 497871 is an instance). So let's mark it a WORKSFORME as most of the examples of the request have dedicated rich editors. Mickael, the WORKSFORME status indicate failure to reproduce an issue. It is not intended for a situation like this one. I filed a follow-up ticket for shell scripts: https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=550303 (In reply to Filipus Klutiero from comment #7) > Mickael, the WORKSFORME status indicate failure to reproduce an issue. It is > not intended for a situation like this one. By using the Eclipse IDE as intended and installing the dedicated extension for the listed fileformats, you cannot reproduce this issue. The Eclipse IDE (if using EPP packages) will pop-up a suggestion of what to install in case of a not-yet-supported file. Hence, the use case is IMO not reproducible any more with newer releases, and has good solutions. It's a WORKSFORME. (In reply to Mickael Istria from comment #8) > (In reply to Filipus Klutiero from comment #7) > [...] > Hence, the use case is IMO not reproducible any more with newer releases, > and has good solutions. It's a WORKSFORME. The fact that "it works for me" does not mean "it's a WORKSFORME", at least if you don't pay attention to "it". In this case, "it" is Eclipse 2.0. If you had failed to reproduce with Eclipse 2.0, this could have been set to WORKSFORME. But that you fail to reproduce with a newer Eclipse release only suggests the issue was solved. In this case, part of the issue persists and part was solved, so there is nothing which represents the proper status, but Status certainly should not be WORKSFORME. |