Bluefish (rant)

Thetargos · #1 3rd October 2006, 11:37 PM

Not a programming post as such, but I have noticed something about this program. I won't go into much of a discussion over if it is a good code editor nor not, or if there are better editors or not. However for some time now I have noticed that out of the blue and all of a sudden, Bluefish tends to eat up a lot, and I mean a LOT of CPU cycles, especially when working with relatively large files (500+ lines). Even though this program supports good features such as multitab multiediting, this kind of defeats the purpose, as it renders the system totally unresponssive.

Anyone else noticed this?

pete_1967 · #2 4th October 2006, 12:49 AM

Contact developers or log a bug for it at http://bugzilla.gnome.org/buglist.cgi?product=bluefish (before you do that - check if one already exists).

Thetargos · #3 4th October 2006, 04:51 AM

I was about to, but wanted to see if anyone else does indeed have this issue or not.

Thetargos · #4 4th October 2006, 05:16 AM

Apparently there's already a bug filed for high CPU Load, but in this case is with the replace dialog. In my case, this happens when even inserting text (albeit having opened the replace dialog) into lines that I will substitute, inserting the new text before the old gives the time to check what changes I'm doing to the file and contrast with the old code... Will have to test further for this and in that case file a bug.

BandC · #5 4th October 2006, 10:36 PM

Bluefish is nice for small files but I also noticed it sometimes get slow with big files. Especially if the file has long lines. Granted I didn't use Bluefish for a long period of time so I'm probably not qualified to say it's slow in general with big files.

Thetargos · #6 4th October 2006, 11:04 PM

Now that you mention it, it indeed shows this behavior with very long lines (a pain for PHP files!) and it it is just worse when these lines are near the end of the file (for some odd and paranormal, law-defying reason). I will file a bug, I like the program, though I reckon it could mature a bit (a lot?) more, though some features are deffinitely steps in the right direction. Will conduct a few more tests before pointing my finger on the long-lines-near-EOF. Thanks for the insight!