KDevelop 5 too slow?
René J. V. Bertin
rjvbertin at gmail.com
Wed May 3 10:05:08 BST 2017
René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> I also notice that the OP uses clang-4.0 . I wasn't even aware it was finally
> released, it wouldn't be a pre-release version built with assertions, would
FWIW, I just installed the official llvm.org 4.0 packages for Ubuntu 14.04
(4.0~svn297204-1~exp1). Judging by the sheer install size they could well be
built with assertions.
I rebuilt the KDevelop clang plugin against that version and I did a few quick
comparisons running (hopefully) just the parser via the problem toolview's
refresh button.
On a 1.6Gh Intel N3150 cpu off a ZFS pool running from a Seagate SSHD and using
2 CPU threads for the parser (with the default 500ms delay), I observe
- in both cases it takes roughly 2.5s for the progress bar to appear after I
click the refresh button
- the progress bar jumps from 0 to 100% after roughly 12s with clang 3.9 and 15s
with clang 4.0
- in both cases the progress bar disappears after roughly 17.5s, possibly
slightly later with clang 4.0
This is parsing the kclock.cpp file from github.com/RJVB/kclock.k5s .
KDevelop4 doesn't seem to like this project; it fails complains about
KClockWidget class members; possibly as a result it takes a bit over 30s to
(re)parse the entire file.
Neither are exactly fast of course, even for a Celeron-class CPU.
Would libclang allow parsing only a part of the active document, say the
function in which an edit was made?
R.
More information about the KDevelop
mailing list