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.

Bug 62218 - Renaming variable in guarded block should invoke refactoring
Summary: Renaming variable in guarded block should invoke refactoring
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: guibuilder
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Code (show other bugs)
Version: 5.x
Hardware: All All
: P2 blocker with 3 votes (vote)
Assignee: issues@guibuilder
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on: 48288
Blocks:
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2005-08-12 13:32 UTC by Milan Kubec
Modified: 2007-06-15 15:49 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Issue Type: ENHANCEMENT
Exception Reporter:

Attachments
screenshot (15.02 KB, image/png)
2005-08-12 13:33 UTC, Milan Kubec 		Details
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Milan Kubec 2005-08-12 13:32:38 UTC 
[dev-200508111800, JDK 1.5.0_04]

User can rename component variable through its properties on panel Code (take a
look at attached screenshot). Such rename should invoke refactoring operation too.
Comment 1 Milan Kubec 2005-08-12 13:33:06 UTC 
Created attachment 23759 [details]
screenshot
Comment 2 Jan Becicka 2005-08-25 10:08:23 UTC 
Form module should be able to handle this.
Comment 3 thomassrtanner 2006-12-20 12:54:32 UTC 
Hear hear. If you need to rename a field declared in a form, it is at best a 2
step process - refactor and rename, folloed by rename in the form. If you are
unlucky, it is more steps than this because you have to then rename the field in
every code snippet. This is tedious and error prone.
Comment 4 thomassrtanner 2006-12-20 12:54:52 UTC 
Hear hear. If you need to rename a field declared in a form, it is at best a 2
step process - refactor and rename, folloed by rename in the form. If you are
unlucky, it is more steps than this because you have to then rename the field in
every code snippet. This is tedious and error prone.
Comment 5 Michel Graciano 2007-01-04 10:39:39 UTC 
I think this is duplicate for issue 48288, or not?
Comment 6 Tomas Pavek 2007-01-04 10:57:03 UTC 
Have no strong opinion about this. Can be considered a duplicate of 48288 in 
the sense that we need to make the GUI builder cooperate when refactoring 
happens. OTOH initiating the refactoring from GUI builder can be viewed as an 
additional request. In either case, 48288 must be done first.
Comment 7 Tomas Pavek 2007-06-15 15:49:52 UTC 
Done together with issue 48288.