Adding functionality to change the delay time to expand the tree while searching.

[ShahzaibIbrahim]

Fixes (eclipse-jdt/eclipse.jdt.ui#1337)

Related Commit to eclipse-jdt/eclipse.jdt.ui#1246. (This needs to be merged before the mentioned pull request.)

[fedejeanne]

I noticed there is also a FilteredTree for E4 (org.eclipse.e4.ui.dialogs.filteredtree.FilteredTree). I think these improvements would also make sense in there.

I would pass the timeout as a constructor parameter and make it final. Make sure to let the default (no-args) constructor call the new (1-arg) constructor with the current value of 200 to preserve the current functionality.

[github-actions]

Test Results

   920 files  +  307     920 suites  +307   40m 25s ⏱️ + 14m 35s
 7 524 tests ±    0   7 373 ✅ ±    0  150 💤 ± 0  1 ❌ ±0 
22 150 runs  +6 407  21 764 ✅ +6 335  385 💤 +72  1 ❌ ±0 

For more details on these failures, see this check.

Results for commit 83b00bd. ± Comparison against base commit 3c86ecf.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[fedejeanne]

Looks good in general, I only have one minor change request about preserving the @since information in a constructor and some nit-picking suggestions to reduce code duplication in other constructors (I think it improves readability too when one calls other constructors).

Please also squash commits.

[HeikoKlare]

Recent changes do not reflect my initial comment (#1824 (comment)):

As an additional note: the public API should not expose an information about a "refresh job". The public API could state that there is some delay after which the tree contents are refreshed, but doing that via a job is an implementation detail that should be hidden from the public API.

[fedejeanne]

Ready to go on my side (after removing the last unnecessary empty line).

Please address Heiko's comment though.

[HeikoKlare]

I have two further comments. One is only about clarity, the other is about incorrect versioning, if I am not mistaken.

[HeikoKlare]

Please also adapt the commit message according to the information in the CONTRIBUTING.MD, i.e., with a one-line title and and a short description of what the commit does. In particular, when referring to an issue in the commit message it should be placed in the "official" GitHub repositories (and not, e.g., in https://github.com/vi-eclipse/ like in the current commit message).

[HeikoKlare]

Functionally, this looks fine now, thanks!

Sorry for being nitpick about the commit message, but it is currently rather confusing: the header states something about the move refactoring, but the commit is about making the refresh delay for the FilteredTree configurable, so that's what the commit message should state. It does not really matter for this commit that the (first) consumer of this functionality will be the move refactoring of JDT. In addition, the issue reference in the commit message is wrong. It points to #1337. You can keep the link to the JDT issue in the commit message description, but the short link #1337 in the commit message header will not point to a JDT issue but to platform UI. So please remove the #1337 reference from the commit message header.

[HeikoKlare]

I am sorry, but there is still a reference to an unrelated issue (#1337 of platform.ui instead of jdt.ui) in the commit message.

[ShahzaibIbrahim]

I am sorry, but there is still a reference to an unrelated issue (#1337 of platform.ui instead of jdt.ui) in the commit message.

Sorry for that. The issue was linked by itself. All I wanted was just plain-text issue reference that I added below.

[HeikoKlare]

Thank you for the contribution.

[HeikoKlare]

Failing test is unrelated: #1005