Some Eclipse Foundation services are deprecated, or will be soon. Please ensure you've read this important communication.

Bug 95181

Summary: [content assist] Regression: Javadoc popup not displayed for constructors
Product: [Eclipse Project] JDT Reporter: Randy Hudson <hudsonr>
Component: TextAssignee: Tom Hofmann <eclipse>
Status: VERIFIED FIXED QA Contact:
Severity: major    
Priority: P2    
Version: 3.1   
Target Milestone: 3.1 RC2   
Hardware: PC   
OS: Windows XP   
Whiteboard:
Bug Depends on: 98711    
Bug Blocks:    

Description Randy Hudson CLA 2005-05-13 13:37:01 EDT 
Given:
Tracker tracker = new Tracker(<<CONTENT ASSIST>>);

The 4 proposals are tracker's two constructors, and 2 anonymous inner class
entries.  The javadoc for Tracker's constructors only get displayed if I select
the anonymous suggestions. I tried other classes and got the same behavior.
Comment 1 Dani Megert CLA 2005-05-30 04:32:09 EDT 
So far parameter code assist never showed the hover in those situations.
Comment 2 Randy Hudson CLA 2005-05-31 10:58:35 EDT 
I am trying to see the javadoc for a specific constructor, not for the 
paremeters in the constructor.

I just verified that this was working fine in 3.0.1.
Comment 3 Dani Megert CLA 2005-05-31 12:52:41 EDT 
You're right, I tested something different. Marking as RC2 candidate to investigate.
Comment 4 Dani Megert CLA 2005-06-06 17:26:54 EDT 
We're good in time. Promoting this one to P2.
Comment 5 Tom Hofmann CLA 2005-06-07 12:02:51 EDT 
The problem is with core - there is no way to distinguish constructors from methods.

If bug 98711 does not get resolved, we can get the javadoc using a fairly
precise heuristic - we can assume a method is a ctor if type name and method
name are equal. This will fail in this class using an admittedly very bad style:

class Test {
  public Test(int i) {}
  public void Test(int i) {}
}
Comment 6 Randy Hudson CLA 2005-06-07 12:26:23 EDT 
Has core made a breaking change? If so, it should be mentioned in the porting 
guide.
Comment 7 Tom Hofmann CLA 2005-06-07 12:31:02 EDT 
Not directly - we are using new API (CompletionRequestor vs. the old
infrastructure). But the new API seems to be less expressive in this particular
case.
Comment 8 Tom Hofmann CLA 2005-06-08 08:35:50 EDT 
fixed > 20050608
Comment 9 David Saff CLA 2005-06-09 07:09:20 EDT 
http://Verified in N20050609-0010.  Tom, please update state to VERIFIED
Comment 10 Tom Hofmann CLA 2005-06-09 08:36:26 EDT 
.