f



xcode 3.1.2 1613.0/1614.0/1591.0 (sdk 3.1.3) strikes again

Beware of a developer with access to threads:
while debugging an app in xcode on ipod
Xcode manages to tie up BOTH cores on mac mini (cpu idle is never
above 15%
and xcode cpu usage is %150-170%)
I'm doing absolutely NOTHING on desktop: just sitting watching the top
-o cpu output
while a QA slave is trying to crash my app on the ipod
tethered to the mac mini

trying to move a cursor in a source code window is a rather painful
experience

naturally gdb barely uses ANY cpu cycles, ditto the userspace kernel
processes

I dare not to think what xcode predecessor was like if people rave
about xcode being
two heads above the old junk
0
isquat (163)
3/12/2010 11:08:15 AM
comp.sys.mac.advocacy 34242 articles. 0 followers. Post Follow

5 Replies
2149 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 47

On 12 =DC=D0=E0, 13:08, "Squat n'Dive" <isq...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Beware of a developer with access to threads:
> while debugging an app in xcode on ipod
> Xcode manages to tie up BOTH cores on mac mini (cpu idle is never
> above 15%
> and xcode cpu usage is %150-170%)
> I'm doing absolutely NOTHING on desktop: just sitting watching the top
> -o cpu output
> while a QA slave is trying to crash my app on the ipod
> tethered to the mac mini
>
> trying to move a cursor in a source code window is a rather painful
> experience
>
> naturally gdb barely uses ANY cpu cycles, ditto the userspace kernel
> processes
>
> I dare not to think what xcode predecessor was like if people rave
> about xcode being
> two heads above the old junk

unbelievable: this happens when the device has timers active (firing).
Apple: would you fix your shit, please?
0
Squat
3/12/2010 11:16:00 AM
On 2010-03-12 11:16:00 +0000, Squat n'Dive said:

> Apple: would you fix your shit, please?

Raise a bug report. <https://bugreport.apple.com>
-- 
Chris

0
chrisridd (687)
3/12/2010 1:14:30 PM
In article 
<a04fcaaa-5fc1-416a-8f71-dd315a803b15@e1g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
 "Squat n'Dive" <isquat@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 12 ���, 13:08, "Squat n'Dive" <isq...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Beware of a developer with access to threads:
> > while debugging an app in xcode on ipod
> > Xcode manages to tie up BOTH cores on mac mini (cpu idle is never
> > above 15%
> > and xcode cpu usage is %150-170%)
> > I'm doing absolutely NOTHING on desktop: just sitting watching the top
> > -o cpu output
> > while a QA slave is trying to crash my app on the ipod
> > tethered to the mac mini
> >
> > trying to move a cursor in a source code window is a rather painful
> > experience
> >
> > naturally gdb barely uses ANY cpu cycles, ditto the userspace kernel
> > processes
> >
> > I dare not to think what xcode predecessor was like if people rave
> > about xcode being
> > two heads above the old junk
> 
> unbelievable: this happens when the device has timers active (firing).
> Apple: would you fix your shit, please?

What makes you think Apple is listening to you in this venue?

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR
0
Jolly
3/12/2010 4:03:34 PM
On Mar 12, 3:08=A0am, "Squat n'Dive" <isq...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Beware of a developer with access to threads:
> while debugging an app in xcode on ipod
> Xcode manages to tie up BOTH cores on mac mini (cpu idle is never
> above 15%
> and xcode cpu usage is %150-170%)
> I'm doing absolutely NOTHING on desktop: just sitting watching the top
> -o cpu output
> while a QA slave is trying to crash my app on the ipod
> tethered to the mac mini
>
> trying to move a cursor in a source code window is a rather painful
> experience
>
> naturally gdb barely uses ANY cpu cycles, ditto the userspace kernel
> processes
>
> I dare not to think what xcode predecessor was like if people rave
> about xcode being
> two heads above the old junk

As a Mac developer for the past 20+ years, lemme just say xcode sucks.

Lightspeed C was the shit, and it all went downhill from there.

0
Mr
3/13/2010 6:41:21 AM
In article
<d2c4adb1-4a45-4633-9b33-3beaa5df28f6@k5g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, Mr
X <imouttahere@mac.com> wrote:

> > I dare not to think what xcode predecessor was like if people rave
> > about xcode being
> > two heads above the old junk
> 
> As a Mac developer for the past 20+ years, lemme just say xcode sucks.

true. the best that can be said about it is that it works. not much
more.

> Lightspeed C was the shit, and it all went downhill from there.

lightspeed c became think c and was quite good until symantec got its
grubby hands on it and fucked it up big time. metrowerks codewarrior 
became *the* development environment (even worked cross platform), but
unfortunately, they sold their intel compilers to nokia just months
before apple decided to switch processors. oops.
0
nospam
3/13/2010 7:15:08 AM
Reply: