This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.

Bug 96612 - Bad responsiveness of C/C++ debugging
Summary: Bad responsiveness of C/C++ debugging
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 95567
Alias: None
Product: cnd
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Debugger (show other bugs)
Version: 5.x
Hardware: All All
: P2 blocker (vote)
Assignee: _ gordonp
URL:
Keywords: PERFORMANCE
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-02-26 19:03 UTC by _ rkubacki
Modified: 2009-06-25 10:59 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Exception Reporter:

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description _ rkubacki 2007-02-26 19:03:36 UTC 
Feedback from the NB5.5 performance survey:

The responsiveness of the debugger in C/C++ apps is terrible! Actually, I have
used Eclipse with CDT to build/test my C/C++ apps, but would be great if
Netbeans fix it. I'm currently using Netbeans more than Eclipse.
Comment 1 _ gordonp 2007-02-28 19:17:34 UTC 
Do you have an email address from the user? Did your survey ask if users
could be independently contacted? If possible, I'd like to ask further
questions of the user.
Comment 2 _ rkubacki 2007-02-28 19:33:59 UTC 
Generally people who put their email into form agreed that we can contact them
(see http://performance.netbeans.org/survey/nb55-performance-survey-form.html).
Unfortunately this feedback came without email.
Comment 3 Maria Tishkova 2007-03-01 09:52:43 UTC 
Gordon, please look at the http://www.netbeans.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=95567
I have filed against gdb-lite performance. I think this is one of the problem
users can meet using gdb-lite.
Comment 4 _ gordonp 2007-05-23 01:05:32 UTC 
Because we couldn't get further information from the user, I'm closing this
as a duplicate of 95567. I'm fixing 95567 as well as other performance issues
in grgich_hills.

*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of 95567 ***