In Toad 12.6 and before Toad shows red connector lines to the left of my code, connecting loop and end-loop statements, of if, else, and end if statements.
In the 12.7 Beta these lines have disappeared. I have searched the options menus for the editor, but found no switch to enable/disable this feature.
Has it been removed on purpose? Am I doing something wrong? I have always found these connector lines very helpful when navigating nested blocks that span more than half a display…
I’d love to have them back and would highly appreciate any ideas or suggestions to get that fixed.
In Toad 12.6 and before Toad shows red connector lines to the left of my code, connecting loop and end-loop statements, of if, else, and end if statements.
In the 12.7 Beta these lines have disappeared. I have searched the options menus for the editor, but found no switch to enable/disable this feature.
Has it been removed on purpose? Am I doing something wrong? I have always found these connector lines very helpful when navigating nested blocks that span more than half a display…
I’d love to have them back and would highly appreciate any ideas or suggestions to get that fixed.
But, no. I’ve always had Folding set to enabled, plus/minus.
Which has always served me well.
There used to be small red vertical line between the foliding plus/minus character column and the the actual source code connecting e.g. if and end if statements so that blocks and embedded blocks stood out clearly.
Also there used to be a red horizontal line in between procedures and/or functions defined inside a package (used to hold for both headers and bodies).
I appreciated them very much. Wonder where they have gone. Bit-bucket? I’d hope not!
Both of the items you mentioned are no longer available. The edit control was replaced with a more up to date version. It does many things better, but does not have all of the functionality of the previous control. The vertical lines you mention can still be
achieved if your code is formatted so that indentation matches your tab stop setting. Enable the "Show indentation guides" option on the Editor|Display page in Options, it's off by default. You'll then end up with the following. Also, as Dennis pointed
out the folding indicators now highlight the current block and Toad will highlight matching tokens of all blocks containing the caret position.
The red program separator lines are completely gone. There's no workaround other than for you to use comment blocks to denote your procedure/function start points. In my code I have a comment block above each and I've set the color of comments to red. As I
scroll through the code I can easily identify the start of a new function.
But, no. I've always had Folding set to enabled, plus/minus.
Which has always served me well.
There used to be small red vertical line between the foliding plus/minus character column and the the actual source code connecting e.g. if and end if statements so that blocks and embedded blocks stood out clearly.
Also there used to be a red horizontal line in between procedures and/or functions defined inside a package (used to hold for both headers and bodies).
I appreciated them very much. Wonder where they have gone. Bit-bucket? I'd hope not!
I think I’ve got it. It requires not only folding, but also “Box Tree”. With folding set to “Plus/Minus” I do not get the red highlighting in the folding column. Very helpful to have it back!
You also mentioned I should have my formatting to match my tab settings. I do have that (2 spaces per tab). I understand how I can use the dotted vertical lines to find matching lines. Just to be pedant: sometimes locates blocks on a non-matching indent. Example:
As you can see the select is aligned on an even position, whereas the case is indented to an odd position.
Not a big deal, but if this is what we’ll have to with in the future, I’d like to have an explicit formatting option to force block alignment to tab boundaries.
Would that be feasible?
I did some more testing. I have a union of two selects. When I click the second ‘select’ verb the red indicator line in the in the folding column highlights both select statements. I would have expected that in case I’d made the ‘union’ keyword current. Would it be feasible to reduce the indicated area to teh subselect only, rather than the entire statement?
Another find: when I select ‘begin’ then the entire body is indicated, and the associated keywords ‘exception’ and ‘end’ are highlighted in grey. That’s fine.
However, when I select the keyword ‘procedure’ only the parameter list is indicated. I’d like to have a quick way of highlighting/indicating an entire procedure/function, without first needing to scroll past all declarations.
As far as I’m concerned, this might be implemented on either the procedure/function keywords or on the is/as keyword.
Circle tree will also do it. Arrow and Plus/Minus styles do not draw the connecting lines thus nothing to highlight.
sometimes locates blocks on a non-matching indent
I see.
I'd like to have an explicit formatting option to force block alignment to tab boundaries.
I'm not sure if this is already possible, but I'll forward the request on to see what the formatter guys have to say about it.
Would it be feasible to reduce the indicated area to teh subselect only, rather than the entire statement?
It would be quite an effort with little return. From what I can see 12.6 did the same. I think it's more intuitive that folding occurs at logical positions like open and close parens, entire statements, entire blocks, etc. Folding on individual clauses, expressions,
and other pieces makes for a big headache and opens the door for all kinds of error. Your best option would be to hide what you don't want to see by selecting lines and using the rt-click "Hide Lines" feature. To show the lines click on one of the two gutter
indicators marking the start and end of the hidden range.
I'd like to have a quick way of highlighting/indicating an entire procedure/function, without first needing to scroll past all declarations.
This is the ideal behavior and I'll work on it soon. There's an item in the Idea Pond for highlighting of all keywords in a block which was the impetus for the change in direction here for 12.7. It's highly voted up, but there are also comments in there to
have an option to disable it. I'll expand this feature as well as add an option, defaulting to enabled.
I think I've got it. It requires not only folding, but also "Box Tree". With folding set to "Plus/Minus" I do not get the red highlighting in the folding column. Very helpful to have it back!
You also mentioned I should have my formatting to match my tab settings. I do have that (2 spaces per tab). I understand how I can use the dotted vertical lines to find matching lines. Just to be pedant: sometimes locates blocks on a non-matching indent.
Example:
As you can see the select is aligned on an even position, whereas the case is indented to an odd position.
Not a big deal, but if this is what we'll have to with in the future, I'd like to have an explicit formatting option to force block alignment to tab boundaries.
Would that be feasible?
I did some more testing. I have a union of two selects. When I click the second 'select' verb the red indicator line in the in the folding column highlights both select statements. I would have expected that in case I'd made the 'union' keyword current.
Would it be feasible to reduce the indicated area to teh subselect only, rather than the entire statement?
Another find: when I select 'begin' then the entire body is indicated, and the associated keywords 'exception' and 'end' are highlighted in grey. That's fine.
However, when I select the keyword 'procedure' only the parameter list is indicated. I'd like to have a quick way of highlighting/indicating an entire procedure/function, without first needing to scroll past all declarations.
As far as I'm concerned, this might be implemented on either the procedure/function keywords or on the is/as keyword.
thanks for your answer. The hide-lines feature was new to me. It’s a nice feature - thanks for showing me.
As far as intuituin goes: I think that’s pretty personal, subjective. For me every select ‘feels’ like a logical block of code. However, with the hide-lines feature and the general sense of direction you’ve inidicated, I’m quite happy.
However, when I select the keyword 'procedure' only the parameter list is indicated. I'd like to have a quick way of highlighting/indicating an entire procedure/function, without first needing to scroll past all declarations.
I think I've got it. It requires not only folding, but also "Box Tree". With folding set to "Plus/Minus" I do not get the red highlighting in the folding column. Very helpful to have it back!
You also mentioned I should have my formatting to match my tab settings. I do have that (2 spaces per tab). I understand how I can use the dotted vertical lines to find matching lines. Just to be pedant: sometimes locates blocks on a non-matching indent.
Example:
As you can see the select is aligned on an even position, whereas the case is indented to an odd position.
Not a big deal, but if this is what we'll have to with in the future, I'd like to have an explicit formatting option to force block alignment to tab boundaries.
Would that be feasible?
I did some more testing. I have a union of two selects. When I click the second 'select' verb the red indicator line in the in the folding column highlights both select statements. I would have expected that in case I'd made the 'union' keyword current.
Would it be feasible to reduce the indicated area to teh subselect only, rather than the entire statement?
Another find: when I select 'begin' then the entire body is indicated, and the associated keywords 'exception' and 'end' are highlighted in grey. That's fine.
However, when I select the keyword 'procedure' only the parameter list is indicated. I'd like to have a quick way of highlighting/indicating an entire procedure/function, without first needing to scroll past all declarations.
As far as I'm concerned, this might be implemented on either the procedure/function keywords or on the is/as keyword.
