IDE (IntelliJ IDEA) support for Raw String Literals

[Anna Kozlova]

at the end of the string (`abc<caret>`), the additional tick would move the
caret outside (`abc`<caret>), like it works now for normal strings. If you
want additional quotes around RSL, there would be a separate surround with
action or dedicated intention.  My question was indeed about second case
only, thanks for mention this explicitly.

On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 6:56 PM, Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com> wrote:

> I think there are two cases:
>  - when you're at the _end_ of the string and the next character is the
> auto-inserted close quote;
>  - when you're in the _middle_ of the string.
>
> For the first case, I think treating it as you do with double-quote in
> regular strings is right; most of the time, when I type tick-stuff-tick, I
> am ending my raw string literal, so ticks at the end of the string should
> be considered to be the closing delimiter(s).
>
> For the second case, you've already got a well-formed RSL, and you're
> adding stuff in the middle.  I would bias towards (1), with the option of
> an intention to add (or subtract) more ticks to the delimiter.  (The
> intention should skip over tick counts where the body would collide with
> the delimiter, and I'd think this should always be available on RSLs,
> regardless of whether I'm typing more ticks in the middle or not?)
>
> If what I want to do is break the thing up, I'll probably just type
> tick-plus-stuff-plus-tick, and if I ignore the offered intention, I'll get
> what I want.
>
>
> On 4/20/2018 12:36 PM, Anna Kozlova wrote:
>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> we started developing the support for raw literals and would like to ask
>> what do you think.
>>
>> Given a string `a<caret>b` and press ` at <caret>, what is the expected
>> behavior?
>>
>> 1. Just insert tick: result is `a`b` where it would be parsed as raw
>> literal (`a`), unknown identifier (b) and new raw literal till the end of
>> file. Second ` at the same position will fix parsing. If one tick was
>> intended, one would need to call an intention to fix the number of quotes
>> around initial raw literal.
>>
>> 2. Add additional quotes around initial raw literal: result is ``a`b``.
>> Literal is valid but to get `a` + `b` expression, one need to go to the
>> string start/end and change the number of ticks or call an intention.
>>
>> It looks like to me that (1) would be needed more often, like each time
>> when one needs to dynamically compose a string. (2) is more about injected
>> code in the raw strings which IDE could treat differently anyway. (It's
>> possible to create an IDE switcher between these strategies but still the
>> default value would be needed.) I would love to see other use cases as
>> well.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Anna
>>
>
>