Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Enable completion of scoped variables without specifying scope #20340

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Enable completion of scoped variables without specifying scope #20340

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

MartinGC94
Copy link
Contributor

PR Summary

Changes how completion of variables with scopes are handled, so variables like: $Global:TestVar = "Hello" can be completed without specifying the scope like this: TestVar<Tab>.
Also enabled completion of variables with the using scope so this: $TestVar="Hello";$using:Tes<Tab> completes the variable.

PR Context

PR Checklist

@pull-request-quantifier-deprecated
Copy link

This PR has 53 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

Quantification details 

Label      : Small
Size       : +32 -21
Percentile : 21.2%

Total files changed: 2

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +26 -21
.ps1 : +6 -0

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

@StevenBucher98 StevenBucher98 added the PowerShell-Docs not needed The PR was reviewed and doesn't appear to require a PowerShell Docs update label Sep 25, 2023
@microsoft-github-policy-service microsoft-github-policy-service bot added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Oct 2, 2023
@iSazonov
Copy link
Collaborator

Changes how completion of variables with scopes are handled, so variables like: $Global:TestVar = "Hello" can be completed without specifying the scope like this: TestVar<Tab>.

I'm not sure it's unequivocally useful and/or convenient. It's better to discuss it in a new issue and get WG's opinion.

Also enabled completion of variables with the using scope so this: $TestVar="Hello";$using:Tes<Tab> completes the variable.

That seems like an oversight. It would have been handy to have. If you put this in a separate PR then I will review it.

@microsoft-github-policy-service microsoft-github-policy-service bot removed the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Dec 20, 2023
@microsoft-github-policy-service microsoft-github-policy-service bot added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Dec 27, 2023
@microsoft-github-policy-service Microsoft GitHub Policy Service
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

@MartinGC94
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm not sure it's unequivocally useful and/or convenient. It's better to discuss it in a new issue and get WG's opinion.

Variable completion includes variables from the session state so if you declare a global variable: $global:Test = "Hello" and run it then it's already included in the results. My change just makes the user experience consistent, regardless if the line with the variable declaration has been run or not.

@SeeminglyScience SeeminglyScience added WG-Interactive-Console the console experience WG-NeedsReview Needs a review by the labeled Working Group labels Dec 4, 2024
@theJasonHelmick theJasonHelmick added WG-Reviewed A Working Group has reviewed this and made a recommendation and removed WG-NeedsReview Needs a review by the labeled Working Group labels Dec 4, 2024
@kilasuit kilasuit added Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed and removed Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed labels Dec 4, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
PowerShell-Docs not needed The PR was reviewed and doesn't appear to require a PowerShell Docs update Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed Small WG-Interactive-Console the console experience WG-Reviewed A Working Group has reviewed this and made a recommendation
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
6 participants
@MartinGC94 @iSazonov @kilasuit @theJasonHelmick @StevenBucher98 @SeeminglyScience