(no title)
dons | 4 years ago
Our focus has been on very large scale, multi-language code indexing, and then low latency (e.g. hundreds of micros) query times, to drive highly interactive developer workflows.
dons | 4 years ago
Our focus has been on very large scale, multi-language code indexing, and then low latency (e.g. hundreds of micros) query times, to drive highly interactive developer workflows.
gwbas1c|4 years ago
Specifically, things like "Go to definition," and tab completion have been in industry-leading IDEs for at least 20 years.
What's novel about Glean? It seems like a lot of hoops to jump through when Visual Studio (and Visual Studio Code) can index a very large codebase in a few seconds. (And don't require a server and database to do it.)
Perhaps a 20-second video (no sound) showing what Glean does that other IDEs don't will help get the message across?
WastingMyTime89|4 years ago
I think you are not thinking large enough. An IDE absolutely can not index a very large codebase and allow users to make complex queries on it. Think multiple millions lines of code here. The use case is closer to "find me all the variables of this type or a type derived from it in all the projects at Facebook" than "go to this definition in the project I'm currently editing".
conradev|4 years ago
Facebook could spend a lot of money to get engineers beefy workstations, and then have each of these workstations clone the same repository and build the same index locally.
Or, they could leverage the custom built servers in their data centers (which are already more energy-efficient than the laptops), build a single index of the repo, and serve queries on-demand from IDEs throughout the company.
I could also see an analytics angle to this if it could incorporate history and track engineering trends over time. In my experience, decision making in engineering around codebase maintenance is usually rooted in “experience” or “educating guessing” rather than identifying areas of high churn in the codebase or what not.
masukomi|4 years ago
I'd add that I didn't want to click "get started" because i didn't know if it was a thing i wanted, and then "get started" actually took me to documentation, which is not what i expect from a "get started" button. The Documentation had the presumption that i wanted to use it, and thus the implication that i knew wtf "it" was.
I don't care about its efficiency, or declarative language, or any of that when i still don't know what we're talking about.
n_jd|4 years ago
- find references / go to definition for web tools, like when reviewing pull requests
- multi-language refactoring, e.g. modifying C bindings
- building structural static analysis tools like coccinelle, or semgrep, but better
rad_gruchalski|4 years ago
maccard|4 years ago
fnord77|4 years ago
gravypod|4 years ago
mhitza|4 years ago
When doing large system refactoring searching by code patterns is the number one thing I'd like to have a tool for. For example being able to query for all for loops in a codebase that have a call to function X within their body.
progval|4 years ago
And what would be the disk and memory requirements for this? Could they be distributed across a handful of servers?
dmos62|4 years ago
gricardo99|4 years ago
zerr|4 years ago
soonnow|4 years ago
dons|4 years ago
Imagine an IDE plugin that queries Glean over the network for symbol information about the current file, then shows that on hover. That sort of thing.
the_duke|4 years ago
Seems like there are only indexers for Flow and Hack though.
Will there be more indexers built by Facebook, or will it rely on community contributions?
simonmar|4 years ago
dons|4 years ago
pdpi|4 years ago
gaogao|4 years ago