AutoComplete? ESTK CS4

[_Ariel_Walden_]

Hello.

I would expect the automcomplete of the ESTK to function as follows:

Let's say I type, somewhere in my code

LocationOptions.

I would expect, once I've typed that last dot, to be given a list of
possibilities (e.g., "AFTER, AT_BEGINNING, AT_END") etc.

But I'm not given such a list.

Have I misunderstood it's purpose?

Thanks for any clarifications,
Ariel

[Harbs.]

Autocomplete in ESTK CS4 is a bit iffy... It worked better in the last
version.


--
Harbs
http://www.in-tools.com

[_Ariel_Walden_]

Alright. (By the way, how was the shlach manos? ;-)

[Harbs.]

Ariel_Walden@adobeforums.com wrote:
> Alright. (By the way, how was the shlach manos? ;-)
>
> Great. Thanks! Nice card by the way. ;)

I recently started taking to writing my code in BBEdit. The autocomplete
there and in TextMate are great. I'm currently in the process of trying
to decide between BBEdit and TextMate for writing code. Both are WAY
better than the ESTK.

I might just end up using both of them, as they each have their own
strengths.

Some of the options in TextMate simply boggle the mind. I think there
should be some way to create an ExtendScript bundle for TextMate, which
should give some incredible features. Maybe I'll look into this some day
when I have time...

These are both Mac programs. I don't know what there is comparable on
the Windows side of things...

--
Harbs
http://www.in-tools.com

[Steven__]

I Don't Think A Language Like JavaScript Could AutoComplete Like That. Only A Strong Typed Language Like C++ Or VB When Variable Types Are Declared Gives The AutoComplete The Knowledge Needed To Know What Properties And Methods Exist. But In JavaScript The Language Is Too Loose To Accurately Predict The Applicable Properties. Even In CS3 The AutoComplete Would Show All Properties Of All Elements, And Not Of The Current Element

[_Olav_Kvern_]

Steven F. Bryant wrote: "But In JavaScript The Language Is Too Loose To Accurately Predict The Applicable Properties."

It's not a matter of strong vs. loose typing. It's a matter of resources for writing the ESTK. Autocomplete doesn't need to know about the type of the object you're entering, only what the DOM says its properties/methods are.

For whatever it's worth, I get pretty good autocompletion on things like enumerations in the CS4 ESTK, but it guesses poorly or not at all on most other things.

I think a lot of it has to do with performance and the size of the DOM--you'll note that you'll get faster/better responses for basic JavaScript terms or for terms from smaller object models than you do for InDesign (with its monster DOM). I also note that it works better on faster machines. It's clearly dependent on the time it takes to look up a specific object name in the OMV XML file.

Thanks,

Ole

[Fred Goldman]

Another thing to note is that auto-complete doesn't work on custom
variables. For example:

d = app.documents[0];
d.

It will not show me any auto-complete options after typing the d.

[_Ariel_Walden_]

Yes, I noticed that also.
Glad to see there's still room for improvement!
As is often the case, I'm comparing an Adobe product to my experiences using
a MS product, in this case MS Visual Basic editor (the one that comes with
Word). That works as expected, although I haven't used it a great deal.

[Steven__]

Thanks Fred That's What I Was Refering To.

[Steven__]

Notepad++ (Cross Platform) Can Easily Be Extended With XML File To AutoComplete For Your FileType. But It Doesn't Either Support Custom Variables

[Harbs.]

BBEdit and TextMate both support custom variables, although I'm not sure
to what extent you can get them to support properties of custom
variables. (I think you probably can do it with with TextMate, but I'm
still groping my way around the program...)

--
Harbs
http://www.in-tools.com