This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.
I just recently re-organized my .java fiels so I could use the 'java with existing sources' project type. In the past I have ended up with copies of some files with other names, either to save a backup before making a drastic change, or because of how Windows 'work offline' works when both copies have changed. I now find I'm having lots of problems trying to build and run my project, because by default NB is trying to compile *every* .java file under the 'source packages' branch of the project tree. There are always going to be files there that I can't delete, and won't compile for some reason or another. I looked for a property to say 'ignore this file' but couldn't find it. Is it possible to add something like this? Or even better, let the Java dependencies compile only what is needed by the project?
You can press F9 on a particular file to let Java dependencies do their work. Or you can override the compile target to exclude certain things when building the whole project. Or name the files something other name *.java. The IDE cannot safely provide an ignore list for javac because it cannot in fact guarantee that javac will honor it, due to automatic compilation of dependencies.
I understand that javac might still compile something on it's own. I'm just looking for a way to tell NB (or ANT) not to pass javac every file in the tree to begin with. If one of the files that is passed to javac depends on the file that was ignored, then I don't mind javac trying to compile it on it's own. Renaming the files is not an option. I need to beable to double click them and have NB open them in the editor, that means NB needs to recognize their type. Once I do fix them, or want to use them again, I don't want to have to rename them all over again. Changing thier type is a kludge.
Maybe. Not for 4.0.
Again, this is just a matter of GUI; you can easily ignore these files by editing build.xml.
Related to issue #49371.
Marking as API since this would require adding a property corresponding to javac's "excludes" attribute.
*** Issue 51080 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
*** Issue 42884 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
*** Issue 65510 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Feedback from person on the SDN site 2006-05-22 concerning 42884 (Allow to define in/exclude for compilation) [Dup of this issue]: "I totally agree; a UI for in/excluding compilation is essential. I spend hours looking through the help files and references only to discover that it is not available."
*** Issue 82354 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
*** Issue 89706 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
There is a somewhat old proposal here: http://java.netbeans.org/Proposals/Project/sourcepath_excludes.html Does not mention changes to GlobalPathRegistry which would probably be required (see issue #49371 for some background).
cvs rtag excludes_49026_base ant/project java_nowww_1; cvs rtag -b -r excludes_49026_base excludes_49026 ant/project java
Marking as performance related as the use case described here has obvious performance impact.
I don't think this issue itself has much to do with performance, though one of its possible use cases is as a workaround for the separate performance issue #49371.
Rebased to BLD200612061900.
*** Issue 61425 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
*** Issue 91254 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Rebasing to excludes_49026_base_2 and branching ant/freeform also: cvs rtag excludes_49026_base_2 ant/{freeform,project} java_nowww_1; cvs rtag -b -r excludes_49026_base_2 excludes_49026 ant/freeform; cvs up -j BLD200612061900 -j excludes_49026_base_2 ant/project java Details: http://wiki.netbeans.org/wiki/view/Excludes49026
Is this issue going to be implemented for M7?
Probably M8.
Created attachment 39085 [details] Diff of changes
Created attachment 39086 [details] Commit log
Done. For any problems please open separate issues blocking this one.
*** Issue 105197 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
*** Bug 51097 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***