Home » Community » U++ community news and announcements » U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha" [message #60121 is a reply to message #60098] |
Thu, 07 September 2023 22:42   |
luoganda
Messages: 215 Registered: November 2016
|
Experienced Member |
|
|
...this is somehow an extension to this post.
Quote:- New C++ sources indexer mode - previoualy, after each file change, all depended files were reindexed. That often resulted in very heavy CPU load after each header change. In the new mode, only the changed file is being reindexed - while less accurate, real problems in this new mode are actually rare and it makes for much more responsive experience using theide.
I think i see your point here, altough the thing is far from perfect(checked both included clang on w7 and msbt17 and no go).
But i think you forgot to see both point of view:
* from developing upp point of view it's probably better(since new mode recompiles "needed" - mostly developing "system" header sources faster),
* from consumer point of view(just using the ide out of the box for a quick project) - original is magic - it works!
Speed even on slow computers is not bad at all.
It works out of the box also what concerns Navigator window - it affects it. In an attached img it's obvious what i mean,
this is why i have proposed Navwnd in the first place(you don't get that from Navigator bar) - in the pic is what i mean with "panoramic view"(example is simple Ctrl).
With "panoramic view" here - i mean having all parsed structs/etc handy at hand all the time(eg to quickly check it's sources,usage,etc).
Of course - new indexer could use on demand "TriggerIndexer" to show that Ctrl thing - but i think this is out of the scope of this msg.
With this i incline that original and new modes of indexer should be selectable in Settings,
original mode is a must for people who want: "do it's thing at opening project and then just use it",
for "consumer" usage - this will always be better(from just using theide - also for just a quick project).
Even on old computer like mine, original indexer is pretty fast(from "consumer" point of view)
mostly doing it's thing when a project is opened(with this i mostly mean constant system headers), more problems what concerns speed are quite slow compilers.
(in my oppinion c++11 is an absolute must - all new features c++23/etc should be optimized to not become an bloatWare).
Note: this was written after testing v16969.
By the way, personally - i don't know why borland(now embarcadero) has
used new llvm infrastructure - because old bcc compiler with it's turbolinker was quite fast.
By the way2:
where is an example(or doc) using customCompiler
in BuilderSettings since i once used it and it worked out of the box?
[Updated on: Thu, 07 September 2023 23:15] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
 |
|
U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
By: mirek on Tue, 29 August 2023 14:29
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.1 "pre-alpha"
By: omari on Thu, 31 August 2023 18:09
|
 |
 |
Re: U++ 2023.1 "pre-alpha"
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.1 "pre-alpha"
By: Klugier on Sat, 02 September 2023 21:20
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.1 "pre-alpha"
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.1 "pre-alpha"
By: mirek on Tue, 05 September 2023 13:19
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.1 "pre-alpha"
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.1 "pre-alpha"
By: mirek on Wed, 06 September 2023 14:16
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.1 "pre-alpha"
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.1 "pre-alpha"
By: Oblivion on Thu, 07 September 2023 06:54
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.1 "pre-alpha"
By: mirek on Thu, 07 September 2023 08:36
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.1 "pre-alpha"
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.1 "pre-alpha"
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.1 "pre-alpha"
By: Oblivion on Sat, 16 September 2023 20:27
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.1 "pre-alpha"
By: Oblivion on Thu, 31 August 2023 23:17
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
By: luoganda on Thu, 07 September 2023 22:42
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
By: mirek on Fri, 08 September 2023 08:58
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
By: luoganda on Sat, 09 September 2023 10:49
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
By: mirek on Wed, 13 September 2023 11:04
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
By: Tom1 on Mon, 11 September 2023 15:33
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
By: Tom1 on Mon, 11 September 2023 15:38
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
By: mirek on Wed, 13 September 2023 11:34
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
By: Tom1 on Wed, 13 September 2023 12:49
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
By: mirek on Wed, 13 September 2023 13:40
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
By: Tom1 on Wed, 13 September 2023 14:43
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
By: mirek on Wed, 13 September 2023 11:17
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
By: Tom1 on Wed, 13 September 2023 12:42
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
By: coolman on Mon, 11 September 2023 20:00
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
By: mirek on Mon, 18 September 2023 08:55
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
By: Tom1 on Wed, 20 September 2023 20:09
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
By: Tom1 on Wed, 20 September 2023 20:15
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
|
 |
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
By: zsolt on Thu, 14 September 2023 02:11
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun Jul 06 00:15:38 CEST 2025
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02621 seconds
|