From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eric Ludlam Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Using CEDET modules from Emacs core Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 20:15:31 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87k29d7zvw.fsf@engster.org> <87fuk08i01.fsf@engster.org> <87d1f36xnc.fsf@engster.org> <5fbb38e9-9f95-823c-7042-afc9cfa1d863@siege-engine.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1487121348 12830 195.159.176.226 (15 Feb 2017 01:15:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 01:15:48 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 Cc: Dmitry Gutov , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 15 02:15:44 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cdoC8-0002yE-85 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 02:15:44 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37965 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cdoCA-00029Y-TF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 20:15:46 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41425) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cdoC4-00029H-5B for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 20:15:41 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cdoBy-0000uF-M9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 20:15:39 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-qt0-f194.google.com ([209.85.216.194]:33687) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cdoBy-0000ta-Gf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 20:15:34 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-qt0-f194.google.com with SMTP id n13so19584569qtc.0 for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 17:15:34 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=p1OL4fgMBitewVf+gauh3pjsODqo7MayAMjmWf333wA=; b=b1fhJNTEtNG6O1UHaEkXUHBq57WztKNKmuHXUVtt7OXpBbEitkvMod8HdFIwKcDQ0r ue7btNIrxt5+0AUCrDeyFA5hJkeVOun+UWrTbjOO3wABzpitAoq76jGnb9Ny6hfVZNBh BaECUlVjzoup4sYC+QmAWEoR1DGOejljjOjjA1FixKQLNVj8sZ5Q9DUj/+jgI9oRCAYD E+osX6RxKLUKBuRVHElE1nBU75ChjN8YVbpqwfAAQWgcwISUERq7m1DOmVfp4hgL3wib pUkRLlvIYZ/D4nI4EhHzCVAo9/wNUTDn2HRdwAqrZQSxe+wxUOrI6YS6f2g4em5r7TEz Cfhw== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39kbBfbZvNhARlIhOlqWsGP5BvFURe9O2+P0+qCgqJG9hztTaMvgzpLTqoR5F1rZuw== X-Received: by 10.200.37.50 with SMTP id 47mr29400210qtm.233.1487121333687; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 17:15:33 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.202] (pool-100-0-32-98.bstnma.fios.verizon.net. [100.0.32.98]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id x40sm1383002qtx.23.2017.02.14.17.15.32 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 14 Feb 2017 17:15:33 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 209.85.216.194 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:212392 Archived-At: On 02/14/2017 06:45 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote: >>> "Semantic is too slow for C++" complaint (e.g. compared to Clang-based >>> background process solutions) is unlikely to go away. >> While I haven't had time to work on CEDET lately, I'd be happy to discuss >> specific performance issues and share ideas on how to improve them, >> presumably after the most recent merge is completed. > > Isn't it the case that CEDET could also make use of a Clang backend? > Yes. There are many layers in CEDET, and you can hook in external tools at whichever layer makes the most sense. You could use an external parser like clang to produce tag lists, or as a back-end to look up symbols, or just use it for smart completion. There are drawbacks if said tool is only used for smart completion, since other utilities such as tag navigation or decoration would still need a tagging parser. It is generally handy to have an Emacs native parser for when external tools aren't available or only used for higher level functionality, but it is not necessary. Eric