On C/C++ undefined behaviours (there is no "Eclipse")

Bruno Medeiros brunodomedeiros+spam at com.gmail
Tue Oct 5 08:04:51 PDT 2010


On 02/10/2010 17:21, Don wrote:
> retard wrote:
>> Fri, 01 Oct 2010 14:53:04 +0100, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
>>
>>> On 20/08/2010 22:37, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>>> "retard"<re at tard.com.invalid> wrote in message
>>>> news:i4mrss$cam$1 at digitalmars.com...
>>>>> Fri, 20 Aug 2010 19:04:41 +0200, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> What are these Java programs for the desktop that run fast? I haven't
>>>>>> encountered any, but maybe that's just because I didn't try them all
>>>>>> out. Eclipse takes at least 20 seconds to load on startup on my quad
>>>>>> core, that's not very fast. On the other hand, CodeBlocks which is
>>>>>> coded in C++ and has a few dozen plugins installed runs in an
>>>>>> instant.
>>>>> Now that's a fair comparison! "Crysis runs so slowly but a hello world
>>>>> written in Go is SO fast. This must prove that Go is much faster than
>>>>> C+ +!"
>>>>>
>>>>> I think CodeBlocks is one of the most lightweight IDEs out there. Does
>>>>> it even have full semantic autocompletion? Eclipse, on the other hand,
>>>>> comes with almost everything you can imagine. If you turn off the
>>>>> syntax check, Eclipse works just as fast as any native application on
>>>>> a modern desktop.
>>>> I've tried eclipse with the fancy stuff off, and it's still slower than
>>>> C::B or PN2 for me.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> All these comments about Eclipse takes this time to load, or Eclipse is
>>> slow when used, etc., are really meaningless unless you tell us
>>> something about what actual plugins and features are installed and used.
>>>
>>> Unlike CodeBlocks which is "a free C++ IDE", Eclipse proper is the
>>> Eclipse Platform, which is a platform (duh) and doesn't do anything
>>> useful by itself. Particularly since there is not even a standard/single
>>> "Eclipse" download: http://www.eclipse.org/downloads/ , unlike
>>> Codeblocks. The days were JDT would be the main thing 95% of Eclipse
>>> users would use are long gone.
>>>
>>> So are you using JDT, CDT, Descent, something else? If JDT, do you have
>>> extra tools, like the J2EE Web Tools? (these add massive bloat) What
>>> about source control plugins, or plugins not provided by the Eclipse
>>> Foundation, etc? All of these are a wildcard that can affect
>>> performance. For example, I definitely note that sometimes my workspace
>>> chokes when I do certain SVN or file related operations (with Subclipse
>>> btw, not Subversive).
>>> I also noted, when Eclipse 3.6 came out, some sluggishness when working
>>> with JDT, even when just typing code (in this case it was very subtle,
>>> almost imperceptible, but I still felt it and it was quite annoying). I
>>> suspected not JDT, but Mylyn, so I uninstalled it, and now things are
>>> back to normal. (there might be a fix or workaround for that issue in
>>> Mylyn, but since I don't use it, I didn't bother)
>>>
>>> I would definitely be quite annoying if Eclipse was not responsive for
>>> the vast majority of coding tasks.
>>>
>>> As for startup time, I hardly care anything about that :
>>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/
>> Re_Eclipse_startup_time_Was_questions_on_PhanTango_merger_was_Merging_Tangobos_into_Tango_60160.html#N60346
>>
>>> (except when I'm doing PDE development, but that's a different thing)
>>
>> Back then the unhappy user was using a 1 GHz Pentium M notebook. I
>> tried this again. Guess what, the latest Eclipse Helios (3.6.1) took
>> 3.5 (!!!) seconds to start up the whole Java workspace, open few
>> projects and fully initialize the editors etc for the most active
>> project.
>
> That's good news. Sounds as though they've fixed the startup performance
> bug.
>

Not necessarily. Again, you need to consider what is installed and 
loading in Eclipse. In retard's scenario he was loading a Java workspace 
(JDT) whereas your original post was a C++ one (with CDT, I'm guessing). 
Even disregarding the PC specs, it's comparing apples to oranges. 
Eclipse is not like Firefox where the main platform is 90% of the 
code/functionality, and the plugins are only like 5-10%.

> Has the original
>> complainer ever used Photoshop, CorelDraw, AutoCad, Maya/3DSMax, Maple/
>> MathCad/Mathematica, or some other Real World Programs (tm)? These are
>> all fucking slow. That's how it is: If you need to get the job done,
>> you must use slow programs.
>
> That original poster was me. Yes, I've used all of those programs
> (though not a recent version of CorelDraw). The startup time was 80
> seconds, on the most most minimal standard Eclipse setup I could find.
> MSVC was 3 seconds on the same system. I had expected the times to be
> roughly comparable.
>
> There was just something sloppy in Eclipse's startup code.
>

Any Eclipse IDE configuration/distribution is likely never going to 
start fast, at least as fast as comparable native IDEs like MS Visual 
Studio.
Still, I do think that 80 seconds sounds excessive, even for those 
computer specs. But it's likely a CDT issue, not an Eclipse one. Again, 
this distinction has to be considered, you can't just say "There was 
just something sloppy in Eclipse's startup code" or "Eclipse developers 
don't care about performance issues _at all_". The projects that come 
bundled in offical Eclipse distributions are not only separate projects 
(JDT, CDT, WTP, PDT, Mylyn, etc.), like I mentioned in my original post, 
but they are made by completely separate teams, most of them from 
different companies (even for the more popular Eclipse projects).


-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list