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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Intellisense not showing methods from the Base class in Signature Help #1030

Merged
merged 17 commits into from
Dec 8, 2017
+489 −56
Merged

Intellisense not showing methods from the Base class in Signature Help #1030

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
17 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
30c5092
Added code to check for the methods in the base classes
akshita31 Nov 23, 2017
de3de6a
Made changes to avoid the classes in System Namespace and added test
akshita31 Nov 23, 2017
ef0352a
Changed local variables to lowerCase and added spacing
akshita31 Nov 23, 2017
eff068d
Test for Inaccesible Methods
akshita31 Nov 27, 2017
cf8f790
Using GetMemberGroup
akshita31 Nov 27, 2017
6362fda
Unnecessary using removed
akshita31 Nov 27, 2017
997d104
Test for Overloaded Extension Methods
akshita31 Nov 27, 2017
41d4d2c
Changes for handling Extension Methods
akshita31 Nov 28, 2017
2c0bc6f
Added test for Access Modifiers
akshita31 Nov 28, 2017
9cb58b4
Changes for static invocations
akshita31 Nov 28, 2017
07cee28
Removed unnecessary Blank Lines and Renamed IsInStaticContext
akshita31 Nov 29, 2017
29b3803
Added copyright and todo
akshita31 Nov 29, 2017
2e1e0a0
Merge branch 'master' into base_class_func
akshita31 Nov 29, 2017
cda2c28
Changed Language Version
akshita31 Nov 29, 2017
a13a6b0
Added Attribution
akshita31 Nov 30, 2017
17f52cf
Corrected spelling
akshita31 Dec 7, 2017
fbc4c5f
Merge branch 'master' into base_class_func
DustinCampbell Dec 7, 2017
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
10 changes: 9 additions & 1 deletion src/OmniSharp.Roslyn.CSharp/Services/Signatures/SignatureHelpService.cs
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -133,7 +133,15 @@ private IEnumerable<IMethodSymbol> GetMethodOverloads(SemanticModel semanticMode
return new IMethodSymbol[] { };
}

return symbol.ContainingType.GetMembers(symbol.Name).OfType<IMethodSymbol>();
var MethodOverloads = symbol.ContainingType.GetMembers(symbol.Name).OfType<IMethodSymbol>();
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

local variables should start with lowercase

var BaseType = symbol.ContainingType.BaseType;
while(BaseType!=null && BaseType.ContainingNamespace.Name!= "System")
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

spacing is off here.
Also, perhaps it would be better to check for baseTypeSymbol.SpecialType != SpecialType.System_Object and terminate there instead rather than on "System" namespace

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The above mentioned change is failing for the case of attribute constructor as the System.Attribute class doesn't have the SpecialType as System_Object, hence for that case we will also get an Attribute.Attribute method which is not required.This is the reason the System Namespace has been used.

{
MethodOverloads = MethodOverloads.Concat(BaseType.GetMembers(symbol.Name).OfType<IMethodSymbol>());
BaseType = BaseType.BaseType;
}

return MethodOverloads;
}

private int InvocationScore(IMethodSymbol symbol, IEnumerable<TypeInfo> types)
Expand Down
29 changes: 28 additions & 1 deletion tests/OmniSharp.Roslyn.CSharp.Tests/SignatureHelpFacts.cs
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -474,13 +474,40 @@ public Program(Program p, int n)
{
}
}";

var actual = await GetSignatureHelp(source);
Assert.Equal(3, actual.Signatures.Count());
Assert.Equal(1, actual.ActiveParameter);
Assert.Contains("ctor2", actual.Signatures.ElementAt(actual.ActiveSignature).Documentation);
}

[Fact]
public async Task SignatureHelpForOverloadedMethodsInheritance()
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you add a case for methods with the same name that shouldn't be accessible? Eg:

    class Program
    {
        static void Main(string[] args)
        {
        }

        private void Foo() { }
    }

    class G : Program
    {
        protected void Foo() { }
    }

{
const string source =
@"public class MyBase
{
public void MyMethod(int a) { }
public void MyMethod(int a, int b) { }
}
public class Class1 : MyBase
{
public void MyMethod(int a, int b, int c) { }
public void MyMethod(int a, int b, int c, int d) { }
}
public class Class2
{
public void foo()
{
Class1 c1 = new Class1();
c1.MyMethod($$);
}
}";
var actual = await GetSignatureHelp(source);
Assert.Equal(4, actual.Signatures.Count());
}
[Fact]
public async Task SkipReceiverOfExtensionMethods()
{
Expand Down