Hi All,

Not sure if this has been mentioned in any other threads, but an issue I'm seeing is that when I create a new variable, it takes a while for it to become available in the code insight window.

Eg.


If I wait a little while it becomes available (I'm not sure how long...) or change windows it seems to wake it up.

Has anyone else had this problem? Is this a bug?

Thanks, Cameron.

Yes you absolutely right, the same happen with me, I discovered that it usually happen with big PHP scripts. Probably IDE takes some time for analyze. It is useful to press Ctrl+S (save document) after declaring a new variable

Regards

Vitali

p.s. sometimes even code folding or color schema appears a bit later (5sec) but I think we can not do anything except wait

It seems that this "timeout" is what is related to the code insight thing, as well as many other things (errors hilighting, etc). I wonder if this could be made adjustable, as fast machines can handle realtime, or almost realtime, updates.

glad to see its not just me this is happening to. I dont think its limited to large scripts. I've seen it not pick up new variables in scripts with less than 50 lines.

Yeap, I have seen this issure arrise occasionally, doesnt seem to always do it though, and sometimes it doesnt do it at all, its weird.

in normal sense, "realtime" term has no relation to performance at all. Realtime means "100% guarateed responce in a specified time frame", whereas time frame can be even hours. So let's keep it away , we're not about military-purpose IDE

regarding delay, it can't be changed with code insight implementation we have in versions 4.0, 4.5, 4.6 and 5.0. But in the next major version we'll add necessary things to help code completion get its data faster. Also, I'll check if something can be improved sooner.

thanks dmitri. It really is frustrating when you initiate a new variable, and then go to use it a line or few later and it doesnt show up.

I noticed the same annoyance, but figured that the new variable check is only triggered every few seconds for performance reasons.

Also, interesting and very uncommon definition of "real time", but that is a different issue.

seems you're deluded or in a common mistake regarding RTOS. For sure, me definition is too simple, but it's true.
In wikipedia you can find a more descriptive one:

That's one definition. It's also one I'm familiar with, though I don't believe it's the one generally intended when the term is used these days.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&q=define%3AReal-time&btnG=Search

See also:

http://www.websters-online-dictionary.org/re/real-time.html

Where Wikipedia's definition is cited as a specialty definition.

I think what all this boils down to is that "real-time" is one of those terms that has multiple correct, and closely related, meanings, which in turn means that in technical writing, we need to be careful to indicate which definition we're using.

And now, back to the thread at hand.

In this case, my use of "real-time" was faster than the 5 secs or so that it currently takes to refresh the document. User controlled, as Dmitri mentioned above, sounds perfect, allowing it to be adjusted to suit the user.

Guys, please stop this offtopic.
RTOS has nothing to do with "fast performance". The term existed even when computers reacted in hours. What's important for RTOS is a GUARANTEED response in predictable (or as I said - "SPECIFIED" - a bit stronger) timeframe, nothing else. Please re-read the definitions or just trust to a guy who participated in some development for RT devices and knows the matter .
Anyway, if you trust me or not, it won't change anything on this matter.
That's enough for now and for this topic in particular.