Re: r4401 - trunk/woproject/wolips/core/plugins/org.objectstyle.wolips.locate/java/org/objectstyle/wolips/locate/scope

From: Mike Schrag (mschra..dimension.com)
Date: Wed Oct 10 2007 - 12:04:05 EDT

  • Next message: Ulrich Köster: "Re: r4401 - trunk/woproject/wolips/core/plugins/org.objectstyle.wolips.locate/java/org/objectstyle/wolips/locate/scope"

    I just moved the type searching helper code up to the .wolips
    plugin. This is how we find WOElement subclasses inside of
    ComponentEditor. I have not done much with the locator code, but I
    think you may want to consider making this an actual custom search
    rather than a locate scope. When you are searching for Java types,
    you can use Eclipse's index rather than crawler the resource tree,
    which should make things a lot faster.

    Check out WOElementSelectionDialog in componenteditor to see a quicky
    example of using the type SearchEngine API. Incidentally
    TypeNameCollector was taken from an Eclipse example and really should
    be named WOElementTypeNameCollector -- it implements the search
    hierarchy search for WOElements. This may still be too slow for this
    process, we'll have to just see how it goes.

    ms

    On Oct 10, 2007, at 11:39 AM, Mike Schrag wrote:

    >> Author: uli
    >> Date: 2007-10-10 02:49:30 -0400 (Wed, 10 Oct 2007)
    >> New Revision: 4401
    >>
    >> Modified:
    >> trunk/woproject/wolips/core/plugins/
    >> org.objectstyle.wolips.locate/java/org/objectstyle/wolips/locate/
    >> scope/AbstractJavaLocateScope.java
    >> trunk/woproject/wolips/core/plugins/
    >> org.objectstyle.wolips.locate/java/org/objectstyle/wolips/locate/
    >> scope/ComponentLocateScope.java
    >> Log:
    >> http://issues.objectstyle.org/jira/browse/WOL-580
    > This fix took Component Editor performance out behind the barn and
    > shot it in the face ... It takes something like 40 seconds to open
    > a moderately complex component, now (on a MBP). To do component
    > validation, we have to lookup every component that you refer to,
    > which means we're hitting this thing really really hard. Is there
    > any way we can solve this problem in a faster way? If not, I say
    > we back this out and resolve this bug as "sorry rename your
    > component" for now.
    >
    > ms
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Wed Oct 10 2007 - 12:05:28 EDT