This repository was archived by the owner on Mar 3, 2023. It is now read-only.
Document TextEditor::bufferRangeForScopeAtBufferPosition #22475
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Also rename from "bufferRangeForScopeAtPosition" to match similar method names.
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description of the Change
It seemed odd for
bufferRangeForScopeAtCursorto exist withoutbufferRangeForScopeAtBufferPositionexisting, so that one could (e.g.) handle multiple cursors.bufferRangeForScopeAtPositionalready existed (used bybufferRangeForScopeAtCursor). When I went to add docs I noticed that the other public methods ofTextEditorused a particular naming scheme, so I also changed the name to "bufferRangeForScopeAtBufferPosition" to match.Alternate Designs
N/A
Why Should This Be In Core?
Super handy for figuring out scopes from a package. And has more possible uses than the existing
bufferRangeForScopeAtCursor.Benefits
Ditto.
Possible Drawbacks
If a package were using this undocumented API then it would break.
I could leave "bufferRangeForScopeAtPosition" in as an undocumented alias if that's a concern.
Verification Process
It's really just docs. Let me know what you'd like.
Applicable Issues
N/A