From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Engster Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Why code completion using CEDET in Emacs so slow? Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:42:24 +0200 Message-ID: <87zkh6qf7j.fsf@arcor.de> References: <32638310.post@talk.nabble.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1318441375 20820 80.91.229.12 (12 Oct 2011 17:42:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:42:55 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 12 19:42:51 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RE2pN-0000Xy-Dc for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:42:49 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42196 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RE2pH-0000vK-QI for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 13:42:43 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:46546) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RE2pD-0000vC-AB for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 13:42:40 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RE2pC-0001HU-A9 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 13:42:39 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:56351) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RE2pC-0001HQ-0l for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 13:42:38 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RE2pA-0000MY-JW for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:42:36 +0200 Original-Received: from dslc-082-082-175-125.pools.arcor-ip.net ([82.82.175.125]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:42:36 +0200 Original-Received: from deng by dslc-082-082-175-125.pools.arcor-ip.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:42:36 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-Lines: 31 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: dslc-082-082-175-125.pools.arcor-ip.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Mail-Copies-To: never Cancel-Lock: sha1:A9WUVs6dcXR28Ui2ebuO4+rsS4k= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 80.91.229.12 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:82531 Archived-At: Judeau writes: > I recently try KDevelop. It looks up for symbols (variables, function names, > class, struct...) much faster (instantly) than semantic-complete-self-insert > or M-Ret. Using M-Ret is faster, but it does not have nice format like other > IDEs, such as From nil > . In emacs, I must wait for at least ~1 sec, in > many cases, waiting for CEDET to look up all the header files in an included > header files, which takes very long. CEDET will parse the headers once. They will be read from disk cache afterwards. > I used auto complete clang, but it seems to have no speed improvement. Why > is that :( ? I have no idea. Maybe CEDET isn't compiled correctly? > I love Emacs and all, and been using it for my C/C++ for almost > a year until I discover KDevelop. Using Emacs means code completion should > be trivial and optional? I really love this Emacs as an editor and as an > "IDE". I just want to find a way to improve this. > > I notice that when performing auto complete, my disk got accessed a lot. Is > there a way to make the included files stored in memory for faster look up? > Or should CEDET implement this way? Maybe your project is simply very large? Could you give some concrete examples where completions are too slow for you? Maybe CEDET can be tuned to your project by excluding some headers which slow down completion. -David