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

Investigate whether LSP4Jakarta consistently processes fully qualified class names. #507

Open
mrglavas opened this issue Jan 4, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@mrglavas
Copy link

mrglavas commented Jan 4, 2024

  • Check whether LSP4Jakarta has the correct behaviour for applications if they specify a fully qualified class name instead of their simple name (e.g. @jakarta.ws.rs.PUT vs @PUT).
  • Check whether LSP4Jakarta unambiguously matches the expected class names when checking diagnostics, applying quick fixes, etc... (e.g. @jakarta.ws.rs.PUT vs @my.random.pkg.PUT).

Note: We're noticing inconsistencies in the processing of qualified names in the code actions / quick fixes in Liberty Tools for IntelliJ and that code was ported from LSP4Jakarta.

@mrglavas mrglavas changed the title Investigate whether LSP4Jakarta consistently processes qualified class names. Investigate whether LSP4Jakarta consistently processes fully qualified class names. Jan 4, 2024
@mrglavas
Copy link
Author

A couple more tasks for this item:

  • Check for usage of DiagnosticUtils.getSimpleName(). Investigate how it's being used to shorten qualified names and determine if that usage is problematic or may become a problem in the future as Jakarta EE evolves.
  • Review the diagnostic collectors, checking if there are any other methods being used for shortening qualified names.

@mrglavas
Copy link
Author

Should check whether the issues (in Liberty Tools for IntelliJ) with qualified names being tracked here: OpenLiberty/liberty-tools-intellij#879 also apply to this project.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant