ve rename components [message #43140] |
Tue, 22 June 2004 13:28  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
It seems like renaming component will take some considerable processing
power, I know this might be a foundamental limitation because the parser has
to go through all of source code. But is there a more efficient way for
renaming? Would things like limiting user access to only part of the source
code help? I have used other IDE and it seems like they can quickly rename
visual components(maybe I'm wrong on this because I did not do extensive
swing development on other IDE).
If rename has to be slow, then maybe VE should let user to name their
components upon creation. This is just some suggestion because it has
become a bottleneck of my development. Everytime I rename a component, it
takes about 3 minutes.
thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: ve rename components [message #44174 is a reply to message #44113] |
Fri, 25 June 2004 17:27  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: richkulp.NO.SPAM.us.ibm.com
First, are the field and the get method private? If they aren't then yes
it will be slow. Can't help that.
However, if they are both private, to see if it just takes a long time
to do this in the JDT or is it in the VE do this:
Select the getMethod in the texteditor, do ctrl+1 on it, select the
entry that says "Rename in file", then hit enter. Then just change the name.
See if this is slow. If it is, then the problem is JDT. If it is fast,
then it is the VE.
>
--
Thanks, Rich Kulp
|
|
|
Re: ve rename components [message #592388 is a reply to message #43140] |
Tue, 22 June 2004 14:41  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: richkulp.NO.SPAM.us.ibm.com
Are you using the latest VE 1.0.0? We've fixed it to be an order of
magnitude faster then 0.5.0. You can change a name by selecting the
fieldName property on the property sheet and entering a new name.
--
Thanks, Rich Kulp
|
|
|
Re: ve rename components [message #592589 is a reply to message #43197] |
Wed, 23 June 2004 19:16  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Yes I'm using the latest VE.10.0. Does change fieldName property go through
a different process than rename?
It's faster than previous version but still excruciatingly slow. Sorry I'm
just trying to understand, maybe the rename need a completely new approach
for its implementation.
thanks
-jonathan
"Rich Kulp" <richkulp@NO.SPAM.us.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:cb9ug6$vgg$1@eclipse.org...
> Are you using the latest VE 1.0.0? We've fixed it to be an order of
> magnitude faster then 0.5.0. You can change a name by selecting the
> fieldName property on the property sheet and entering a new name.
>
>
> --
> Thanks, Rich Kulp
>
>
|
|
|
Re: ve rename components [message #592624 is a reply to message #43723] |
Thu, 24 June 2004 10:15  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: richkulp.NO.SPAM.us.ibm.com
It does a local rename assuming that the variable and get methods are
private. This is because if they are private, then we know that no other
class could be referencing it so we don't need to save the class and to
go through all other classes to see if they need to have it renamed. If
one of them is not private, then it goes through the old refactor rename
process so that other classes referencing the field/get method will get
renamed too. But I understand why it would be excruciatingly slow. It
just does a search and replace text within the file. That shouldn't
cause it to be slow. The only thing I can of that would make it slow is
that you are renaming a visual container that has many
children/grandchildren because we need to dispose and recreate the
component being renamed. Other than that it should be very very fast.
--
Thanks, Rich Kulp
|
|
|
Re: ve rename components [message #592760 is a reply to message #43821] |
Fri, 25 June 2004 14:35  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Thanks for the elaboration. I have a rather large GUI(5000 lines of source
code in a single class), actually it's not that large. But every time I
change the field name or rename, it hangs for a long time(2 min or so) and
sometimes just stopped responding all together, sometimes the GUI is blurred
out. I guess maybe it takes too much memory and cpu power. The component
that was trying to rename is just a JPanel that doesn't have anything on it
yet. If it's just walking through the current file and replacing the text,
I don't understand why it's so resource-intensive. I have a rather modern
machine(2ghz and 1gb ram)
If you have any suggestion for tuning performance that would be great.
thanks
-jonathan
"Rich Kulp" <richkulp@NO.SPAM.us.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:cbenlr$vus$1@eclipse.org...
> It does a local rename assuming that the variable and get methods are
> private. This is because if they are private, then we know that no other
> class could be referencing it so we don't need to save the class and to
> go through all other classes to see if they need to have it renamed. If
> one of them is not private, then it goes through the old refactor rename
> process so that other classes referencing the field/get method will get
> renamed too. But I understand why it would be excruciatingly slow. It
> just does a search and replace text within the file. That shouldn't
> cause it to be slow. The only thing I can of that would make it slow is
> that you are renaming a visual container that has many
> children/grandchildren because we need to dispose and recreate the
> component being renamed. Other than that it should be very very fast.
>
>
> --
> Thanks, Rich Kulp
>
>
|
|
|
Re: ve rename components [message #592782 is a reply to message #44113] |
Fri, 25 June 2004 17:27  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: richkulp.NO.SPAM.us.ibm.com
First, are the field and the get method private? If they aren't then yes
it will be slow. Can't help that.
However, if they are both private, to see if it just takes a long time
to do this in the JDT or is it in the VE do this:
Select the getMethod in the texteditor, do ctrl+1 on it, select the
entry that says "Rename in file", then hit enter. Then just change the name.
See if this is slow. If it is, then the problem is JDT. If it is fast,
then it is the VE.
>
--
Thanks, Rich Kulp
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.50467 seconds