Talk:Code completion

message: *What about the Borland C++ Builder feature called CodeInsight ? Wasn't this the first use of such an autocomplete feature ? rjb
*Some people view the IntelliSense technology as an incremental innovation on ideas gathered from free software tools such as GNU Emacs and Vim. However, the crucial difference between IntelliSense™ and the previous autocompletion facilities is that the IntelliSense autocompletion options are based on the semantic (as a C++ class will show only that class' members regardless of how many other similar words exist in the file), rather than textual nature of the material, hence Intelligent Sense.
While I have no doubt that there is some prior art related to Intellisense, this paragraph is the usual "zOMFG M$ doesn't innovate even if they do" claptrap. -- klaus
: Unfortunately the statement that the idea originated with Microsoft is not supported by a reference.  What about this article from 1983?  Thomas Reps, Tim Teitelbaum, Alan Demers. "Incremental Context-Dependent Analysis for Language-Based Editors." ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems. Vol. 5, No. 3, July 1983, 449-477. It seems to be evidence that the idea did not originate with Microsoft.  Is there support for the claim in the article? Dpv 22:27, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I didn't add that specific claim to the article, but I agree that it requires a cite. Having said that, there's ideas and then there's implementations. I do know that intellisense was first implemented by Matthew Curland , an ex-Microsoft employee that used to work on the VB team. All other implementations I've seen essentially copy Microsoft's, but then there is prior art for everything out there. Certainly the "ideas that originated with free software" thing is a washout in any case. If we go with your reference whatever form of Emacs that existed in 1983 (Teco?) sure as heck didn't have this feature. Heck, Vim just got autocompletion in version 7. Perhaps the phrase could be re-worded to avoid the implication that the idea originated with Microsoft. -- klaus
Didn't Symbolics Lisp Machines do this? Rsynnott 15:34, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Prior art

message: A bit too much of a pat on the back for such a simple implementation of the general idea of autocompletion. Did a Microsoftie write this? :-) C'mon, let's tone it down a bit.
Even if a Microsoftie did... what happens? Microsoft tries to increase speed in development. Is something bad?
I'm more interested in the the use of the Ctrl-Space shortcut to jump start this feature. --Uncle Ed 03:41, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Raving

message: IntelliSense is a pale cousin to DEC's Language Sensitive Editor (LSE) implementation.  To this day you can't easily extend IntelliSense or any of its modern brethren IDEs. In 1992 or 1993 we had full language implementations of LSE.
Not sure what the correct action to take to include this information (it would be great to spur on some open source activity in this direction -- the editor was easily programmable and this was ENCOURAGED).  There is a wikipedia page for LSE here Language-Sensitive_Editor
Gkluthe (talk) 09:12, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins of IntelliSense 

message: It is worth a mention that lots of IDEs use this now. Dreamweaver, Netbeans... Worth mentioning in the article, or removing this article altogether.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.155.130.233 (talk) 18:06, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too standard 

message: IntelliSense doesn't just refer to Microsoft's implementation of "intelligent sense", it in fact encompasses a wide of array of code completion/querying/and syntax checking capabilities of a programming environment. The article is way to biased, it portrays that Microsoft invented these features originally, when in fact they did not and they were around long before Microsoft even thought of them. Please help clean up the neutrality of this article. 141.151.246.76 (talk) 09:54, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Neturality 

message: http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/pers/hd/k/Kaiser:Gail_E=.html
She is the one responsible for developing mainy of the logical components found in modern intell-sense implementations while at Columbia Unviersity in the late 1980's.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by TronLover (talk • contribs) 09:12, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gail E. Kaiser 

message: Should this page also mention Gnome Code Assistance (https://wiki.gnome.org/Projects/CodeAssistance)? --Tobias1984 (talk) 16:52, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gnome Code Assistance 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Intelligent code completion. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121022091418/http://www.stanford.edu/~learnest/spelling.pdf to http://www.stanford.edu/~learnest/spelling.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:39, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Is 'Intelligent code completion' really a standard term agreed upon by many experts? A single citation is given as justification.
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_completion" redirects to "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autocomplete#In_source_code_editors", yet this "Intelligent_code_completion" page is the one that appears top-most in popular search engines. There is the danger that because of that, people might be lead to think that 'intelligent code completion' is the de-facto standard term, so I just wanted to make sure that this is really the case.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.225.72.221 (talk) 06:45, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably not. I can move the article. –Gluonz talk contribs 15:48, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title 

message: No mention of modern artificial-intelligence features that can do advanced refactoring and even suggest entire lines of code based on context and the programmer's habits. I've just added a very brief mention of Visual Studio 2022. Equinox ◑ 12:56, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. This should probably be brought up-to-date and mention more present-day AI features (especially with the developments which have occurred since you posted this). –Gluonz talk contribs 15:47, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is very out of date now