IntelliSense, Part 2 (The Future)

Rebuilding Intellisense

Visual C++ Team Blog — Wed, 27 May 2009 19:34:39 GMT

Hi, my name is Boris Jabes. I've been working on the C++ team for over 4 years now (you may have come

Dev10 Is Just The Beginning

Visual C++ Team Blog — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 19:49:57 GMT

Hello, I’m Mark Hall, an architect in the Visual C++ group. I wanted to follow up on Jim Springfield’s

My Visual Studio vNext wish list

Granville Barnett — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 13:21:44 GMT

My wish list for Visual Studio vNext isn't that long. The things I would like to see in Visual Studio

My Visual Studio vNext wish list

Granville Barnett — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 13:21:20 GMT

My wish list for Visual Studio vNext isn't that long. The things I would like to see in Visual Studio

re: IntelliSense, Part 2 (The Future)

sidinsd — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 19:21:00 GMT

Is there a way to customize the Quick Tips tooltips that Intellisense displays when you hover over a method's name?

re: IntelliSense, Part 2 (The Future)

Noran — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 17:41:49 GMT

I never doubt that Visual C++ team can do a better job than Visual Assist X. But all these years , from vc 6.0 to vc 9.0, I have to pay some dollars to get a license of VAX, just because I hate to press Alt + ->

"Best of luck with development, I look forward to using it!"

re: IntelliSense, Part 2 (The Future)

Leo Treggiari — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:57:36 GMT

With IntelliSense improving, wiil the VC++ product continue to support generating Browse Information (.bsc files)? If so, what will Browse Information do that IntelliSense won't?

Thanks,

Leo

re: IntelliSense, Part 2 (The Future)

Qwe — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:26:59 GMT

Why do you guys keep the OLE DB wizard source closed anyway? It makes code gen useless for C++ devs and ADO.NET is just a hack plenty of companies refuse to use.

I agree you have a tough time ahead with Intellisense and editors (which should be CLR like fuzzy work anyway), but look around and you'll find guys with great AST ideas for C++ (apart from EDG etc).

My main worry is that you guys are underfunded in C++ land, all while we are seeing 300MB silly SilverLight and WPF apps that will never ever make any business sense, not in the next 10 years for many, many app.

If CLR team could just get their act together and polish up page faults on GDI+ and get it into harware acceleration, you have a fast enough environment to do all the editor work.

But that's a whole different topic and project to compiler, it being better exposed for preprocessing/introspection/code-gen/optimisation/etc/etc, and the idea you ought to have it opened up so it can shine with integration that managed crowd would never understand anyway (they are ignorant enough as is)..

re: IntelliSense, Part 2 (The Future)

Steve Nuchia — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:42:24 GMT

One thing that would be nice to have "while you're at it" in the database: If you would provide for storage of historical / statistical / estimation(?) data on the build times for projects and translation units it could be used by the parallel build scheduler to do a much better job.

As it is, the scheduler will frequently end up building a "large" project (or dependency chain) single-threaded at the end of the job. If it had data on build history it could push the prerequisites for that project forward and get better overall build performance. Statistics on individual translation units wuold be needed to do this for incremenatal builds.

Making the "units" for this performance data somewhat insensitive to platform scale would help if it will be possible to share the database among team members: we don't all have the same vintage machines.

re: IntelliSense, Part 2 (The Future)

Scott Colcord — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 04:53:09 GMT

"The parser is also designed to be extremely resilient and will be able to handle ambiguous code, mismatched braces or parentheses, and supports a 'hint' file. Due to the nature of C/C++ macros and because we aren’t parsing into headers, there is good bit of code that would be misunderstood. The hint file will contain definitions for certain macros that fundamentally change the parsing and therefore understanding of a file."

Hmm...ever heard of an OO toolkit from about 10 years ago called 'Genitor'? It used pretty much this exact approach to reverse-engineer C++ code.