Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Qt Creator 6 Released For This C++ Focused IDE, Clangd Now Fully-Supported

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • tildearrow
    replied
    Originally posted by RealNC View Post
    Yes. It's the result of using the clang stuff. The original code model was extremely fast, but they didn't want to update it for modern C++ (too much work) and decided to use the clang code parsers. And they are slooooooooooooooow.

    I think Microsoft's intellisense code model is pretty much unbeatable right now when it comes to speed.
    Sadly, IntelliSense (at least as in the one used in the official C++ extension for VSCode) is extremely buggy and every damn time I edit my code it bugs out and stops highlighting/suggesting/parsing:

    Leave a comment:


  • lowflyer
    replied
    Now after 3 days of work with Qt Creator 6.0.0 I am pleasantly surprised. The speed has improved significantly. Coloring and highlighting is faster and no longer these 5 minute wait times just to open a project. Now it works mostly without crashes. I just had a few "clangd has crashed" messages which you can simply click away. And clazy now finally works.

    However it is still a bit "unresponsive" at times. The intellisense pop-ups are still way too slow.

    Leave a comment:


  • ddriver
    replied
    And for the sake of full disclosure, I am not trashing on clion - it is an extremely good c++ ide, for what it is, and relative to the competition. And while not free or even cheap, the price is a tolerable expense to the typical salary for c++ developers even in the less fortunate parts of the world.

    It is just that my use case is very different from what clion caters to. I get to use my own coding convention, which is far more concise than the overly verbose "boy scout" style that clion is generating, and that most companies in the industry mandate for some reason.

    So it is not accidental, if you are someone who has to conform to verbosity, and especially if someone else does the logical process of giving you specific requirements, and all your job boils down to implementing that logic, it is a great tool, goes to show that they are really investigating and properly targeting the hurdles and needs of the industry. It will save you not only time to type the boilerplate, or even the need to know the language that well (which is not necessarily a good thing).

    But it is not just code generation and auto-complete, it has many more tools to solve many common tasks. It is very good for debugging - way better than creator, better than visual studio.

    It is a very good tool. So I guess what my previous post wanted to illustrate is that the promise of a tangible productivity boost is mostly snake oil. It will not make you a better programmer, just make your life as a programmer a wee bit easier, at an additional cost of workflow complexity. And being so good also explains its high system requirements, it does more work to provide all of its assists.

    And out of the box, without any configuration I think it tries a bit too much, it is very verbose in terms of meaningless warnings and encouragement to conform to someone's notions of programming, a bit too much for me. I know what works and what doesn't, and 99% of those suggestions merely add more verbosity to achieve identical result, they do not translate to any actual runtime improvements, and I don't like that.

    Whether all this is worth it - I don't know, I can't honestly say I know any good programmers using it, while knowing a few really good ones who use rudimentary IDEs that provide little more than basic code editing, and could definitely afford clion but don't. So clearly it is not a requirement or guarantee for excellence in any capacity.

    YMMV - there is a 30 days trial, trying it is the only way one can tell for himself.
    Last edited by ddriver; 06 December 2021, 12:10 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • quaz0r
    replied
    Originally posted by ddriver View Post
    I will give it a few more days, but overall I don't see my trail extending in a paid subscription.
    interesting. thanks for the review

    Leave a comment:


  • ddriver
    replied
    Originally posted by quaz0r View Post
    i wish a billionaire would just buy out jetbrains and open-source clion
    I've never tried that one before. I used visual studio a couple of years ago at work, and that was kinda trashy and bloated, so I decided to give clion a try for 30 days.

    From ease of use side, it is great, it detected my msys2 installation, compilers, debuggers, parsed my packages, parsed the include files and whatnot... all automatic, didn't have to do anything. That's +1 right there.

    But boy is it slow... just as slow as qt creator in its current bad state, if not slower. And memory usage is massive, that's already 1.5 GB of ram for a hello world project, wrote a couple of classes, linked Qt libs, and it went up to 2.5 gb... over essentially nothing.

    Clion's big deal appears to be it myriad of boilerplate generators, and sure they save on having to type, but it doesn't seem that much of a productivity booster.

    On their side, testimonials say:

    "CLion takes a lot of the toil out of C++, allowing me to concentrate on the interesting part: problem solving."
    First part - sure, but does it really allow you to concentrate more on development? It adds a slew of "macro/generators" that you have to memorize and use to generate every bit of boilerplate. So in a way, it actually adds more noise to the development process in the name of automatic boilerplate. Locating, navigating and populating all them generator forms doesn't seem much faster than typing the code yourself, and sure - I could probably get faster at it after using it for a while, but overall I am not that enticed by this functionality.

    It would probably make more sense in some corporate environment, where they have the dumbest coding conventions imaginable, but when it comes to my personal projects, I've adopted a coding style that actually eliminates the need to have most of the boilerplate.

    For example, I prefer creating small implementations directly in the header and class body rather than doing single liners in the cpp, and only resort to that when there's forward declarations and such. Or when I have members that are both readable and writable, I just use a public member, rather than a private member plus accessory. I use a set of plain old macros to implement properties and such, so I end up with a lot less code compared to what clion showcases to be so good at generating for me.

    It does feel more polished and full featured that creator, but for qt development it is actually no that good. It doesn't have qml support, it doesn't have all the android related stuff that's coded into creator. Creator also has some refactoring and its own macro system, which can do a lot of what clion does.

    I will give it a few more days, but overall I don't see my trail extending in a paid subscription.

    Leave a comment:


  • Maxzor
    replied
    Originally posted by RealNC View Post
    Yes. It's the result of using the clang stuff. The original code model was extremely fast, but they didn't want to update it for modern C++ (too much work) and decided to use the clang code parsers. And they are slooooooooooooooow.

    I think Microsoft's intellisense code model is pretty much unbeatable right now when it comes to speed.
    Had no issued in past years with qtcreator, actually it pretty much rocks.

    Originally posted by oleid View Post
    Well, that's the difference between a compiler and a language server. Rust has the same problem with their original language server (RLS). It basically called the compiler each time a file changed. but the new one is specifically engineered for that use case.
    Rls should not be used currently, but instead rust-analyzer.

    Leave a comment:


  • ddriver
    replied
    Originally posted by lowflyer View Post

    When you switch off the clang code model the old model is still available. Even then the creator is slower. So I would argue that it is *not only* the clang code model. However the Creator has gained a little bit stability over the years.

    I agree about micro$oft's intellisense. But I remember the times where it would crash and you literally had to dig into the system to delete some files to get it back working again.
    Absolutely, it is not just the clang code model. I spent a lot of time with it disabled, and overall experience wasn't tangibly better.

    They also added telemetry, internal update checks and who knows what else.

    I've tried disabling pretty much all non-essential plugins and I honestly can't say that it solves the issue.

    Leave a comment:


  • RealNC
    replied
    Originally posted by Mangix View Post
    meh no meson support still.
    They did add it. But you need to enable it explicitly in the plugins and it's marked as experimental.

    Leave a comment:


  • lowflyer
    replied
    Originally posted by RealNC View Post
    Yes. It's the result of using the clang stuff. The original code model was extremely fast, but they didn't want to update it for modern C++ (too much work) and decided to use the clang code parsers. And they are slooooooooooooooow.

    I think Microsoft's intellisense code model is pretty much unbeatable right now when it comes to speed.
    When you switch off the clang code model the old model is still available. Even then the creator is slower. So I would argue that it is *not only* the clang code model. However the Creator has gained a little bit stability over the years.

    I agree about micro$oft's intellisense. But I remember the times where it would crash and you literally had to dig into the system to delete some files to get it back working again.

    Leave a comment:


  • lowflyer
    replied
    Originally posted by ddriver View Post
    Has anyone noticed how the last couple of years creator has gotten rather bloated and unresponsive, lagging out when processing the code model, or outright breaking until the view is closed and reopened?
    Yes. This is the main burden for us. We are at the point of abandoning Qt Creator for our development.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X