Hi, I finally found some time and implemented that idea. Code lives on http://qt.gitorious.org/~ilyesgouta/qt-creator/qt-editor
So far, the changes actually are disabling some portions in the build system (all the non needed plugins and supporting code) and modifying CppTools to not depend on ProjectExplorer and SearchSymbol, etc. To Qt Creator developers: is it OK to name this editor qt-editor? I'm also thinking about just Editor. I also intend to package this for Fedora. The tree include a .spec file to just do that. Is there any restrictions that I should be aware of? Thank you guys for the nicely designed, awesome QtCreator! -Ilyes On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 12:15 AM, Bill King <[email protected]> wrote: > On 07/30/2010 07:14 PM, Hunger Tobias (Nokia-MS/Berlin) wrote: >> On 30.07.2010 10:57, ext Danny Price wrote: >> >>> TextMate is a very heavy-weight product. Ideally this Creator 'Lite' >>> would just be a text editor with syntax highlighting (it doesn't really >>> need auto-completion). >>> >> Arent there lots of lightwight text editors with syntax highlighting >> available already? Why add another one? To me creator shines since it >> understands the code I write. So some simple regular expression based >> syntax highlighting is not enough. >> >> Of course you can just take the C++ engine build into creator (just >> include cplusplus.pri into your project, it is meant to be reusable) and >> build a more light weight editor. Of course for the engine to work >> properly you need to provide it with information like which other files >> are there, where to look for files to include, etc. ... basically all >> the stuff that makes a project:-) >> >> >>> Most importantly, it must launch really fast. The >>> recent releases of Creator have started to become rather sluggish on >>> startup; VisualStudio 2008 actually launches faster on my machine now >>> than Creator which isn't good. >>> >> Where does it take so much time? It feels pretty fast for me (less that >> 3s). I did have trouble with sluggish startup for a while on windows >> though. Turned out that my proxy setup in windows was to blame. Windows >> insisted on figuring out by waiting for a timeout that I do not need a >> proxy (automatic proxy configuration)... and it insisted on blocking >> while doing this:-/ >> >> > I've seen this too, and have tracked it down as far as I can tell to the > plugin loading at startup. For example, mine takes up to 10 seconds to > load on a 4 core, 4Gb memory, 3GHz machine. > I'll try and get some more concrete figures when I get some time. If we > can either async, or deferred load the plugins, then I think we'll see a > great speedup in startup. > > -- > Bill King, Software Engineer > Qt Development Frameworks, Nokia Pty Ltd > Brisbane Office > > _______________________________________________ > Qt-creator mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.trolltech.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator > _______________________________________________ Qt-creator mailing list [email protected] http://lists.trolltech.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
