1

I am getting some disappointing completion and go-to-definition results with ropemacs in places where I use multiple name-bindings to the same object.

Considering my contrived and stylistically challenged example code below, does anyone know why rope would not be presenting completions or go-to-definition results?

Project code sample: 

from Package import BigObjectWithLotsOfMethods

class GLOBAL:
    variable = None

big = BigObjectWithLotsOfMethods()
GLOBAL.variable = big

Emacs behaviour in question:

When I enter: 

big.

then type M-/, I get a list of candidate method names as expected. Hurray for rope!

Yet on the other hand when I enter: 

GLOBAL.variable.

for example, and then type M-/ I get the following in the Emacs minibuffer: 

Completions for GLOBAL.variable.: [No Match]

Furthermore, please imagine fire() was a method of BigObjectWithLotsOfMethods then typing C-c g on the code GLOBAL.variable.fire() does not take me to the definition of fire() as expected but rather just outputs the following in the Emacs minibuffer: 

Cannot find the definition!

Since GLOBAL.variable represents simply another name binding to the BigObjectWithLotsOfMethods instance I am surprised that rope is not doing something intelligent like inferring the definition from what it knows about big.

The question:

Why is such an apparently trivial level of support for code introspection in the presence of multiple name binding not working under rope? Am I missing something fundamental in my rope project configuration that addresses this for example?

Any help gratefully received.

codeasone
  • 1,953
  • 2
  • 23
  • 30

1 Answers1

0

One would imagine that because you are introducing one level of indirection, that rope no longer is smart.

Note I haven't played with Rope in a while because I found it getting in the way more than it helped. Also it was a bit slow. Mostly using M-/ with a combination of pyflakes/flymake instead on emacs. (One downside to M-/ being that you have to type the method out the first time). Of course if Rope started giving more bang and costing less buck, I might be tempted to revisit it.

I wonder if the py-dev, pycharm engines are smart enough to handle that.

Matt Harrison
  • 1,225
  • 11
  • 12