Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improve member completion #16504

Merged
merged 13 commits into from
Mar 24, 2022

Conversation

MartinGC94
Copy link
Contributor

PR Summary

Fixes #10529
The member completion code wrongly assumed that the parent to the error statement was what should be completed, instead of traversing up to where the cursor actually was. Now you should get accurate member completion regardless of where the cursor is.
This also adds member completion for switch statements like:

switch ($x)
{
    ''.<Tab>
    {
    }
}

Allows completion of members/attribute arguments regardless of surrounding spaces/new lines (If the parser would allow it in that context).
Adds a test for a seemingly untested scenario: ls "".<Tab>
And filters out attribute arguments that have already been used in the attribute, for example:

function Verb-Noun
{
    Param
    (
        [Parameter(Position=0, <Tab>)]
        [string[]]
        $Param1
    )
    process{}
}

will not show Position again.

PR Checklist

@ghost ghost assigned PaulHigin Nov 22, 2021
@iSazonov iSazonov added CL-General Indicates that a PR should be marked as a general cmdlet change in the Change Log WG-Interactive-IntelliSense tab completion labels Nov 23, 2021
@ghost ghost added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Nov 30, 2021
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Nov 30, 2021

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

Co-authored-by: Ilya <darpa@yandex.ru>
Copy link
Collaborator

@iSazonov iSazonov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Formally LGTM but I don't understand why we need cases like '[System.Management.Automation.ActionPreference]::Break. ^'. It's up to other reviewers.

@MartinGC94
Copy link
Contributor Author

Formally LGTM but I don't understand why we need cases like '[System.Management.Automation.ActionPreference]::Break. ^'. It's up to other reviewers.

For me it's just for the sake of consistency. If the parser allows it then I don't see why the completion code shouldn't support it either.

@PaulHigin
Copy link
Contributor

@TravisEz13 Can you please review?

@ghost ghost removed the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Dec 6, 2021
@ghost ghost added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Dec 14, 2021
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Dec 14, 2021

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

@PaulHigin
Copy link
Contributor

@daxian-dbw Can you please review?

@ghost ghost removed the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Dec 14, 2021
@ghost ghost added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Dec 22, 2021
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Dec 22, 2021

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

@ghost ghost added Waiting on Author The PR was reviewed and requires changes or comments from the author before being accept and removed Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed Waiting on Author The PR was reviewed and requires changes or comments from the author before being accept labels Mar 23, 2022
MartinGC94 and others added 3 commits March 23, 2022 21:48
Co-authored-by: Dongbo Wang <dongbow@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Dongbo Wang <dongbow@microsoft.com>
@pull-request-quantifier-deprecated

This PR has 222 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!


Quantification details

Label      : Large
Size       : +184 -38
Percentile : 62.2%

Total files changed: 3

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +94 -37
.ps1 : +90 -1

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detetcted.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.


Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

Copy link
Member

@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. Thanks @MartinGC94!

@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw merged commit c904d7f into PowerShell:master Mar 24, 2022
@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw assigned daxian-dbw and unassigned PaulHigin Mar 24, 2022
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented May 23, 2022

🎉v7.3.0-preview.4 has been released which incorporates this pull request.:tada:

Handy links:

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CL-General Indicates that a PR should be marked as a general cmdlet change in the Change Log Large WG-Interactive-IntelliSense tab completion
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

type completion overwrites type name with member if accessor appears after cursor
4 participants