faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf
main
parent
thread
|
Re: "Kuanta" ...are you kidding or what?
by manyoso on Tuesday 26/Jul/2005, @07:13
|
It is ok if you are not a developer, but just understand that what seems obvious to you is actually quite naive in actuality. Now, if I sounded hostile it is because there was a very long thread recently on kdevelop-devel that had a lot of _developers_ who were postulating the very same thing. All of them had never written or worked on a code-completion in kdevelop before.
And once again, I know you think it would 'probably worth to marry', but you would be WRONG. This is a naive belief that roughly goes:
"Hmm, we need a great C++ parser for code completion"
"Well, g++ is probably the most complete we could use"
"BINGO! That's a great idea, we should use g++!"
But, once again, this is WRONG!
The parser might be the best at parsing and compiling compilable code, but it sucks as a code completion parser. A code completion parser must be able to parse _incomplete_ uncompilable code. And it can't just produce an error and stop. Think about it...
In short, the g++ parser would have to be so heavily modified that it would lose the advantage of sharing code with the gnu folks. It would fork and diverge. Not only that, but the actual g++ parser would be a pain to retarget and modify -- and yes, I've looked and have actually hacked on both g++ and kdevelop's code completion and parser. |
|
|
![[KDE Dot News]](http://www.kde.org/dot/Images/kdedotnews.gif)
