CLion 1.2.2 RC

Anastasia Kazakova

Hi,

We are nearly ready to publish the 1.2.2 update for CLion, that’s why today we are rolling out the Release Candidate (build 143.1183). Download it from our confluence page or get a patch update, in case you are using previous EAP build.

Several important fixes were included into this build:

  • Includes with upper-case letters were not resolved on case-sensitive file systems.
  • ‘Align when multiline’ option was added to CMake formatter settings list. When the option is selected arguments should be aligned one below the other. Otherwise continuation indent is taken into account.
    align_cmake_setting
  • Problem with __has_attribute macro that was always false.

Find the full list of fixes in the release notes. Feel free to share your feedback in the comments section below and submit feature requests and problems to our tracker.

Sincerely yours,
The CLion Team

Comments below can no longer be edited.

15 Responses to CLion 1.2.2 RC

  1. Roman says:

    December 2, 2015

    It feels like you need to add more people to fix C++ templates resolving. It is critical: lots of C++ libraries heavy rely on meta-programming.

    CMake support is already best in class, it makes no sense to improve it further, more important will be to support other popular build systems: Personally I think you should start from creating build-system independent projects: 1) by parsing build command line, 2) by parsing binary files 3) manually specifying include directories.

    • Anastasia Kazakova says:

      December 2, 2015

      We are currently working on variadic templates. And have some ideas about further Makefiles support. Check our recent post about future plans and next 1.5 release: https://blog.jetbrains.com/clion/2015/11/special-thanks-clion-1-5-roadmap/

      • Roman says:

        December 3, 2015

        Anastasia, variadic templates is C++11 feature, but you have a lot of unresolved C++ 98 bugs, check https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/CPP-2489
        Why do you start implementing C++11/C++14, without fixing base version?

        It is sad to see “Your code has 11 errors” each time you make a commit 🙂

        • Kaiser says:

          December 3, 2015

          At this rate, by the time C++11 support is compete, the industry will be past C++17. Implementing a C++ parser in Java is a recipe for what we have–a mediocre product. There was talk about integrating libclang/libtooling and I’d like to see CLion’s management choose to go in that direction.

          • Anastasia Kazakova says:

            December 3, 2015

            We’ve done many parsers during the company history and believe we can do C++, still we are monitoring all the options, including libclang (yes, we agree, that it looks very promising), however unfortunately there are still reasons we can’t do it right now. Follow the C++ Parser section in this post to read about the reasons: https://blog.jetbrains.com/blog/2015/08/06/jetbrains-way-to-cpp-the-inside-story-of-our-journey/

          • Yury V. Zaytsev says:

            December 3, 2015

            I think we need to be a bit more fair to the CLion team. I’m criticizing them for C++ parsing all the time, but recently I’ve tried the latest version of libclang-based QtCreator on my (rather huge) project, just to get a feeling of what it looks like. I have to say that parsing is perfect indeed, but waiting 1-2 minutes (I’m not kidding!) for the autocompletion to pop up? I’m sorry, but I could just as well code in vim without any autocompletion at this rate… and that was the core of the concerns of the CLion team.

            • Anastasia Kazakova says:

              December 3, 2015

              Thanks, Yury. For your support and for your reports! We really appreciate all of them.

          • Roman says:

            December 3, 2015

            I agree with Yury, Clang based parsing in Linux IDEs is terribly slow: I’ve tried both latest QtCreator and Kdevelop (4.7, probably in 5.0 it will be better) with Clang plugins.

            I’ve heard positive reviews of XCode, but I have not got a Mac to try it myself.

            Nevertheless I feel that current Netbeans C++ parsing is better then Clion. Eclipse CDT have nearly the same issues in my code as Clion.

        • Anastasia Kazakova says:

          December 3, 2015

          We are sorry you have such an experience.
          You are right, that we have quite a lot of problems related to C++ language. They are in our queue and we do our best to fix as much as we can asap. However, the resources are limited, so we can’t do a lot at once. We are working on variadics, but still fixing other issues as well. Please, follow the updates and feel free to report an issue if you feel we are missing some problem.

  2. Anton says:

    December 2, 2015

    Do you plan to finally fix the debugger performance issue? Have you tried to compare the performance of debugger integration with QtCreator’s implementation? It takes about 1-2 seconds to redisplay the contents of any unfolded object. Adding a watch expression for each interesting variable explicitly (to speed up the redisplay process) is very annoying.

    • Anastasia Kazakova says:

      December 3, 2015

      We are constantly improving debugger performance. A lot of fixes were already introduced, more on their way. Do you mean any issues in particular logged to our issue tracker? Please, if you log an issue about the debugger performance, attach logs:
      Configure debug logs (call Help | Configure Debug Log, add #com.jetbrains.cidr.execution.debugger in the windows), collect them while starting a session and share with us.

  3. Roman says:

    December 3, 2015

    Do you share C++ front-end code with Reshaper C++? Or it is different? Is it more mature then Clion?

    • Anastasia Kazakova says:

      December 3, 2015

      It’s two different parsers (since platforms are also very different). We’ve started both in two teams (ReSharper C++ started a bit later than C++ support in AppCode, where CLion actually came from), sharing feedback, tests and experience, and currently having two different approaches to compare.

  4. Roman says:

    December 3, 2015

    Wrote my thoughts about libclang to https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/CPP-81

    I think you can use the best of both worlds by running libclang in parallel to Clion’s own parser: being fast for completion and accurate for code checking and refactorings.

    • Anastasia Kazakova says:

      December 4, 2015

      Thanks Roman. That’s a good approach we were considering, some problems are still on the way, but let me assure you that we are investigating all the options in that direction.

Subscribe

Subscribe for updates