Re: Sorry, but not happy with D2007

David Erbas-White wrote:

The IDE crashes often enough that I automatically hit the 'save' key
every few minutes, and there are often times I prefer to put a
program stub in place to 'remind me' that I intend to put an event
handler there. For example, if I drop an item on a form I typically
put stubs in the event handlers that I believe I'll need so that I
don't forget about them.

Have you tried the more recent versions?

The fact that you've tried to make this 'seamless' fails on two
fronts. Because you 'automatically' remove all empty events, it
forces me to take the EXTRA time to always had a comment line in each
event, which I wouldn't have to do otherwise. And because the IDE
crashes so often, means that I have to take the extra actions of
saving, PLUS I don't have the advantage of 'trying out' things
without extra stuff being added in.

I don't pretend to be saying that the current design is sufficient in
all cases, however it has held up fairly well over the years.

One of my current programs is (frankly) a mess because of the 'crap'
that's been added 'automatically' over the years -- but it's too much
trouble to actually try and go through and see which items that are
included are actually NEEDED.

We too have many times wanted a tool that would help do some kind of
source code scrubbing to help find all those instances of "cruft" based
on some user-defined rule. Sounds easy in theory, very difficult in
practice.

My concern in seeing this is that there was no 'advent' of Error
Insight that just occurred through natural selection. At some point
there should have been some hard, concrete thought put into how
adding items such as Error Insight would AFFECT these early design
decisions. At the very least, AT THAT POINT IN THE DECISION PROCESS,
cleaning up those design decisions should have been put on the 'to
do' list. The fact that a software tools company appears to have
been caught 'off guard' by the 'advent' of these new features does
not engender a feel of security in the development process...

I think we've done that very well. Of course there are some cases that
proved to be more tricky to solve, however the general usefulness of
the feature tended to outweigh some of these rough edges. This is
certainly an area for improvement, but waiting for perfection would
have meant it remained in the lab indefinately.

--
Allen Bauer
CodeGear
Chief Scientist
http://blogs.borland.com/abauer
.