[TxMt] Re: Help funding my TextMate 2 code sprint

[Meryn Stol]

> libclang does semantic analyzing to give a very correct completion result,
based on the actual types.
If starting a process in general does not cause noticeable latency (as
exemplified by the php suggestions), then how would any analysis of code be
any faster if it happened within the TextMate process? The actual work that
needs to be done would be the same, no?

It is somehow really expensive to initialize libclang inside a program? (I
do not have any experience with it) 
One other way the whole process could be more efficient is by keeping the
entire "parse tree" (or so) of the current source code in memory, and keep
it up-to-date while editing (i.e. per keystroke, update the parse tree). Is
that what you have in mind?
Or what else?

Again, I think you're right that for syntax highlighting, things could
better happen in-process.



--
View this message in context: http://textmate.1073791.n5.nabble.com/Help-funding-my-TextMate-2-code-sprint-tp26412p26440.html
Sent from the textmate users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.