Pelles C > Bug reports

POIDE: Function browsing prob

(1/3) > >>

migf1:
Hi guys,

I don't know if I'm the only one experiencing this, but it seems POIDE's full/function browsing starts getting a bit confused after a while. It either looses source files' +/- function (un)folding symbol in the tree, or when it unfolds them (or just some of them) it leaves some functions out of its listing. Sometimes it helps to "Update all depedencies" under the "Project" menu, but it starts again after a little while.

My current project consists of 6 source files, 9 header files (res included) and a resource file. I'm using Pelles C 3.0.4, on WinXP Professional SP1.
Perhaps I should also note, that I'm working on this project on two different PCs. When I want to transfer my work from one PC to the other, I copy the whole project folder to a PenDrive, from where I copy it to the other PC... and vice versa. One of the PCs is running Windows 98SE (fully patched) and the other WinXP Proff SP1.

Is this a known prob or am I doing something I'm not supposed to?

Thanks in advance...

Pelle:
There are known problems with POBR.DLL - the browse information manager. I'm not sure they explain all your problems.

Mainly to speed up things, the program only scan source files - never #include files. This means it will not see some typdef's and macros that might change the syntax from "standard C" to something else ("Windows C"). Since the parsing needs to be fairly low-level to find all browse types, this is a problem.

I will do some research, and let the compiler generate browse information instead. This should give more "exact" information. This will, on the other hand, generate several new problems. For example, I want some of the browse information ("functions") to be available early for a project, before it's even built. There are other problems too.

Pelle

migf1:
Thanks for your rapid answer Pelle!

It's good to know you are aware of the prob and that you have already put it in your to-do list (if I got it right)!

Pelles C is already a stunning package, for which I -for one- am greatful!

Best regards...

Pelle:

--- Quote from: "migf1" ---It's good to know you are aware of the prob and that you have already put it in your to-do list (if I got it right)!
--- End quote ---

Yes, I'm on it. What I meant was that I have tried a few different solutions in the past - none of them completely successful. I can either spend the next xxx versions trying to patch up the current solution, or find another solution with probably new/different problems. Not sure what is best at the moment...


--- Quote from: "migf1" ---
Pelles C is already a stunning package, for which I -for one- am greatful!

--- End quote ---

OK, thanks! :-)

Pelle

migf1:
I wouldn't know how vital it is for PellesC's current code, or how easily can be done (or not) but perhaps a separate, dedicated module/function just for function-browsing (the tree) could be a possibly cleaner solution. I mean, disengaging it from other "irrelative" browsing stuff (e.g typedefs, struct members, etc).

But as I said, above, you know better (and I surely trust you!).

Btw, I have to state that in my time I used many C programming environments on several platforms (VMS, BSD Unix, Atari ST's GEM/AES, Macintosh's Finder and DOS/Windows). I find Pelles C the most compatible to my taste, both aesthetically and functionality-wise (I haven't tried VS though, for which I hear only good things).
This is not just a compliment, it's the plain truth! I haven't programmed for more than 10 years and PellesC (which I recently discovered accidentally) was the main reason for trying to remember the programming skills I used to have once upon a time :-)
Now most of my spare time (which unfortunately isn't too much) goes to learning Windows Programming using Pelles C!
(surprisingly, there are too many similarities in programming the now ancient GEM/AES and Windows!)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page