Complete for-statement

pkg/analysis_server/test/services/completion/statement/statement_completion_test.dart

Index: pkg/analysis_server/test/services/completion/statement/statement_completion_test.dart
diff --git a/pkg/analysis_server/test/services/completion/statement/statement_completion_test.dart b/pkg/analysis_server/test/services/completion/statement/statement_completion_test.dart
index 1b99cfed2f6992a0819587c184cf7ad930e2e456..9f2f70ece580727b4eacb2d5f0df01b49404523b 100644
--- a/pkg/analysis_server/test/services/completion/statement/statement_completion_test.dart
+++ b/pkg/analysis_server/test/services/completion/statement/statement_completion_test.dart
@@ -130,6 +130,132 @@ main() {
         (s) => s.indexOf('while (') + 'while ('.length);
   }
 
+  test_completeForEmptyCond() async {

[Brian Wilkerson, 2017/04/18 17:28:50]

Just a suggestion: you could put each statement kind in it's own test class just
to group the tests without having to have a common prefix for each test. Might
make the code easier to read and maintain.

[messick, 2017/04/18 18:05:52]

Good idea, thanks.

[messick, 2017/04/18 21:35:40]

Done.

+    await _prepareCompletion(
+        '}',
+        '''
+main() {
+  for (int i = 0;) {
+  }
+}
+''',
+        atEnd: true);
+    _assertHasChange(
+        'Complete for-statement',
+        '''
+main() {
+  for (int i = 0; ) {

[Brian Wilkerson, 2017/04/18 17:28:50]

Not knowing exactly how this is suppose to work, I'm a little surprised that
this doesn't automatically add the second semicolon. My expectation, which might
be off, is that this would add as much of the boilerplate as possible.

[messick, 2017/04/18 18:05:52]

I considered that. Two factors dissuaded me. Doing it properly would require
setting up link editing groups. That's not unreasonable but I have not noticed
IJ doing that for statement completion in Java. And IJ only adds at most one
semicolon. However, I should add a TODO to revisit this.

+  }
+}
+''',
+        (s) => s.indexOf('0; ') + '0; '.length);
+  }
+
+  test_completeForEmptyInit() async {
+    await _prepareCompletion(
+        '}',
+        '''
+main() {
+  for () {
+  }
+}
+''',
+        atEnd: true);
+    _assertHasChange(
+        'Complete for-statement',
+        '''
+main() {
+  for () {

[Brian Wilkerson, 2017/04/18 17:28:50]

This, on the other hand, looks right, because we don't know which kind of `for`
loop the user is writing.

[messick, 2017/04/18 18:05:52]

Acknowledged.

+  }
+}
+''',
+        (s) => s.indexOf('for (') + 'for ('.length);
+  }
+
+  test_completeForEmptyInitEmptyCond() async {
+    await _prepareCompletion(
+        '}',
+        '''
+main() {
+  for (;/**/) {
+  }
+}
+''',
+        atEnd: true);
+    _assertHasChange(
+        'Complete for-statement',
+        '''
+main() {
+  for (;/**/) {
+  }
+}
+''',
+        (s) => s.indexOf('/**/') + '/**/'.length);
+  }
+
+  test_completeForEmptyParts() async {
+    await _prepareCompletion(
+        ';)',
+        '''
+main() {
+  for (;;)
+}
+''',
+        atEnd: true);
+    _assertHasChange(
+        'Complete for-statement',
+        '''
+main() {
+  for (;;) {
+    ////
+  }
+}
+''',
+        (s) => s.indexOf('    ') + '    '.length);
+  }
+
+  test_completeForKeywordOnly() async {
+    await _prepareCompletion(
+        'for',
+        '''
+main() {
+  for
+}
+''',
+        atEnd: true);
+    _assertHasChange(
+        'Complete for-statement',
+        '''
+main() {
+  for () {
+    ////
+  }
+}
+''',
+        (s) => s.indexOf('for (') + 'for ('.length);
+  }
+
+  test_completeForMissingLeftSep() async {
+    await _prepareCompletion(
+        '}',
+        '''
+main() {
+  for (int i = 0) {
+  }
+}
+''',
+        atEnd: true);
+    _assertHasChange(
+        'Complete for-statement',
+        '''
+main() {
+  for (int i = 0; ) {
+  }
+}
+''',
+        (s) => s.indexOf('0; ') + '0; '.length);
+  }

[Brian Wilkerson, 2017/04/18 17:28:50]

Add a test for having both an initializer and a condition, but no updater?

main() {
  for (int i = 0; i < 10)
}

[messick, 2017/04/18 18:05:52]

Thanks for catching that. I lost track of that branch and forgot to write the
code for it.

[messick, 2017/04/18 21:35:40]

Done.

+
   test_completeIfAfterCondition_BAD() async {
     // TODO(messick): Fix the code to make this like test_completeIfWithCondition.
     // Recap: Finding the node at the selectionOffset returns the block, not the