c++ code completion status report

Richard Dale Richard_Dale at tipitina.demon.co.uk
Fri Jan 4 19:47:04 UTC 2002

On Friday 04 January 2002 3:17 pm, Tobias Kalbitz wrote:
> Hi K-Team,
> Richard Dale wrote:
> >Yes, KDE Studio doesn't use any XML, just QDom. But XML would be quite
> > large if you wrote it out to disk for a persistant class store, and a lot
> > larger than the original source files I should think. Is it quicker to
> > read and parse XML files than the original C++, Java etc source files (I
> > don't see why it should be)?
> I didn't think so because we can compress the XML files on the fly like
> SO or KOffice and you have only the names from the namespaces,
> methods... to store not the whole source code. The memory is also not a
> problem we can parse the dom tree and store the result in own structs so
> all the same a own parser or doxygen with XML output.
"to store not the whole source code" - but the proposal is to make parsing 
more detailed for code completion, meaning that arguments to methods should 
be stored as well as method names. So after all those extra attributes are 
added, the size of the compressed XML parse tree might still be large. The 
tradeoff for 'store parsed details' might be different compared with 'parse 
on demand'.

But is it quicker to parse the XML sources than the original C++, Java, PHP 
sources? What if the KDevelop parser had a hand tuned lexer, rather than the 
current flex grammar - would the tradeoff be different? I don't know, but 
surely major archictectural changes like this should be discussed on this 
list before they get checked into the cvs. That's how we've agreed to work 
together? But better late than never - this does seem a very good discussion 
about it all :-)..

-- Richard

More information about the KDevelop-devel mailing list