Comments
Sort by recent activity
Bart Read wrote:
That's certainly the problem then. If you have access to it then SQL Server Management Studio doesn't suffer with this problem because it actually gives us full information about undo/redo rather than just saying "hey, something's changed".
Hi, I'm testing SqlPrompt 3 (after using SqlPrompt2) and I also find this issue to be really annoying.
For what you say, I'm guessing the delay is because you're implementing a "smart undo", is this right?. If so, couldn't you just leave the undo alone so QA handles them normally (char-by-char)? It's really, really annoying.
Other than that, and in my 3rd day of testing, looks good.
Well, a small formatting feature I'd like is being able to specify the order of the tables in the ON statement (JOINs), such as
SELECT *
FROM tableA a (NOLOCK)
INNER JOIN tableB b (NOLOCK) ON *a.fieldA = b.fieldB*
(Since I can't set bold text I used stars, '*') So I'd like to use the tables in the order they appear in the whole sentence (a before b).
—As I said before, nothing but a small formatting feature. / comments
Bart Read wrote:
That's certainly the problem then. If you have access to it then SQL Server Management Studio doesn't suffer with this problem because it actually gives us full information abou...
jader201 wrote:
I agree. I also posted this same suggestion on this thread.
I see, I didn't find it because I searched for "indent" / "indentation" :P / comments
jader201 wrote:
I agree. I also posted this same suggestion on this thread.
I see, I didn't find it because I searched for "indent" / "indentation" :P
Certainly the candidate list (intellisense) topic is a hard one to implement, so what about this:
You already have a delay time for the candidate list, what about abiding by it all the times, except when pressing ctrl+space (if applies); i.e. it doesn't matter if I just hit ",", wait for that delay.
If I write exactly a snippet trigger and hit one of the completion keys expand the snippet, it doesn't matter if I was fast enough that the candidate list didn't show, I wouldn't need it anyway (there may be the need to define what completion keys apply for this "exact trigger match" thing, e.g. spacebar and tab may be exceptions).
This, I think, is the behavior most IDEs have, and is quite comfortable, since people will adjust the delay time to their needs/typing-speed and every time we pause a bit thinking on the name of object x the candidate list shows up to save the day (or something like that).
Also, I would like to be able to define what "candidates group" I want by default (e.g. functions). Oh, and don't forget about the code indentation. / comments
Certainly the candidate list (intellisense) topic is a hard one to implement, so what about this:
You already have a delay time for the candidate list, what about abiding by it all the times, exce...
Tilman wrote:
Suggestion: Import v2 snippets
That was on our list, but then things went wrong and we slipped horribly.
I hate to say, "it happens" [image]
Tilman wrote:
Right now I would like to know where does v2 store this text (and also where does v3).
v2: C:\Documents and Settings\<user>\Local Settings\Application Data\Red Gate\SQL Prompt\Options.xml
v3: C:\Documents and Settings\<user>\Local Settings\Application Data\Red Gate\SQL Prompt 3\SQL Prompt 3 Snippets.xml
There's a problem here (at least with my version). I cannot find this file, and it seems SQL Prompt never writes the snippets: I closed everything, deleted the .DBCache files, and restarted Console and Query Analyzer (incidentally, I needed to start SQL Prompt 3 manually) and the snippets were gone (again)
Tilman wrote:
Edit: It would be also well received if I was able to edit an existing snippet by double-clicking on it.
Do you mean double clicking on it in the candidate list, or in the options dialog?
In the options dialog (didn't think in the candidate list)
I have to say, I think this is a way better version than the previous one, that didn't even looked as an alpha (IMO) --or maybe I was just expecting too much, and for this version I wasn't :roll: / comments
Tilman wrote:
Suggestion: Import v2 snippets
That was on our list, but then things went wrong and we slipped horribly.
I hate to say, "it happens"
Tilman wrote:
Right now I would like ...
Same here. Also, it does not seem to consider queries referring the same table twice, since it seems to skip the JOIN's conditions already used (even though is the same table).
On the other hand, the PC I use on my work is a bit limited, it only has 256 MB RAM (and I'm not sure if the video card takes some), so I'm not sure if that could be part of the problem --the SQL server I connect to is outside of my own PC, but that shall not be a problem. / comments
Same here. Also, it does not seem to consider queries referring the same table twice, since it seems to skip the JOIN's conditions already used (even though is the same table).
On the other hand, t...
Hi, michaelb.
I agree, this is just a matter of preferences (it always is, just like "new line brackets"). Also, as for the notation you suggested. I think that's actually the more natural way (I sometimes use it myself), and some times people tend to get unconfortable with the other way around, just like the code below
if ( SOME_CONSTANT == letsUseAnInsanelyVeryLongVariableOrWhateverName ) {
crashOS();
}
The good point on this is that I can mistype and use "=". and nothing happens (well, just the compiler ranting at me) Anyway, still nothing changes, it's a matter of taste [image] / comments
Hi, michaelb.
I agree, this is just a matter of preferences (it always is, just like "new line brackets"). Also, as for the notation you suggested. I think that's actually the more natural way (I ...
Tilman wrote:
Hi Micheal,
thanks for posting. We are aware of the 'self join' issue and it will be fixed in version 3.
I will add your suggestion regarding the order of foreign keys in the ON clause. I take it, your convention is to have the tables in the ON bit the same order as in the FROM ... JOIN part?
Regards,
Tilman
Would this be configurable? I ask because in my case the convention is to use other table (the one at the left of JOIN) first and this table (the one at the right of JOIN) after, that's because more likely you already saw this table, but you won't know what's the other until you scroll to the right / comments
Tilman wrote:
Hi Micheal,
thanks for posting. We are aware of the 'self join' issue and it will be fixed in version 3.
I will add your suggestion regarding the order of foreign keys in the ON cl...
I also have this problem, but the other way around. It seems to happen when I select (from top to bottom) an IF..BEGIN..END block and press TAB, something like this: IF 0 <> @@ERROR
BEGIN
SELECT 0 AS PK
RETURN 0
END
It deletes the code & inserts an END (?!) Edit:
It seems the problem is caused by adding BEGIN and/or END (depending on how you select the text, either top to bottom or viceversa) to the Keywords to capitalize. I add those and some other, but I haven't found any problem with the others (yet?) / comments
I also have this problem, but the other way around. It seems to happen when I select (from top to bottom) an IF..BEGIN..END block and press TAB, something like this:IF 0 <> @@ERROR
BEGIN
...