Developer forums (C::B DEVELOPMENT STRICTLY!) > Development
cb_release_type and GCV's
Biplab:
--- Quote from: jens on December 31, 2012, 02:28:29 pm ---I just read, that you use 12.11, but this comes with trunk after the release, as far as I know.
An annoying dialog pops up, immediately when you set the second option.
--- End quote ---
Ok, I was prompted with that warning. Thanks for showing me the solution. :)
But I second Thomas' opinion.
--- Quote from: thomas on December 30, 2012, 08:21:31 pm ---But if it does, that is an example of needless stupidity.
I'm always saying: Don't make things too smart, because too fucking smart soon becomes stupid. There is no sane reason for Code::Blocks to complain. It looks like you're trying to write a letter. Do you want to use the letter template? Wait a moment...
So what was I saying... if Code::Blocks complains about that combination, we have a bug that needs to be fixed.
--- End quote ---
There is no need to make IDE too smart. There are tons of ways to warn users about bad coding / compilation options. Are we going to implement them all?
We can start by warning users who write unnecessarily complex Macros in C by writing a parser to analyze code on the fly and popping up an Annoying Dialog box. How about implementing a warning about the compiler options Jens explained earlier-
--- Quote from: jens on December 30, 2012, 10:06:47 pm ---What is worse: if you have -g set and also switch -s on (what is in fact an error), -g will be removed silently without any warning (and vice versa).
--- End quote ---
There could be numerous other examples. Do we need them? In my opinion we do not.
MortenMacFly:
--- Quote from: Biplab on December 31, 2012, 03:47:52 pm ---There could be numerous other examples. Do we need them? In my opinion we do not.
--- End quote ---
I agree, but: We did that initially for combination of -s and -g to avoid forum noise because people complained they were not able to debug. I think this is a time-safer. So I wouldn't generally never warn, but warn in cases that safe us time. If the combination -02 and -g leads to cases where we are bugged in the forums I'd rather leave it as it is. I never tried to debug optimised code, but I recall that already now we have forum posts saying that the debugger does not stop at a certain BP which may have its roots in optimised code. Also remember: You are allowed to set these flags - if one is silently removed (which I didn't try to reproduce so far) that that is the actual bug to me. And this is also where "too smart" starts for me: At the time the IDE doesn't allow you to do for not good reason and bugs you over an over w/o the ability to turn it off.
So yes - don't make the IDE too smart but also no - don't make it that simple that we need to answer the same stupid questions in the forums over and over again. Remember: A lot AnnoyingDialogs, including this dialog itself were/was implemented to avoid such scenarios.
What I can also imagine is that we extend the AnnoyingDialog for experts: So that in the (global) settings you have one global option to always turn off these messages. Then, assuming AnnoyingDialogs are for noobs only we could make us happy with a single option.
Jenna:
--- Quote from: MortenMacFly on December 31, 2012, 04:04:37 pm ---We did that initially for combination of -s and -g to avoid forum noise because people complained they were not able to debug.
--- End quote ---
But silently removing options without warning is not a good option in my opinion, even if they can not be used together like -s and -g.
In this case an annoying dialog makes much more sense, than when using -g and -O2 together, which (in general) works.
MortenMacFly:
--- Quote from: jens on December 31, 2012, 04:22:26 pm ---But silently removing options without warning is not a good option in my opinion, even if they can not be used together like -s and -g.
--- End quote ---
I agreed to that already:
--- Quote from: MortenMacFly on December 31, 2012, 04:04:37 pm ---You are allowed to set these flags - if one is silently removed (which I didn't try to reproduce so far) that is the actual bug to me.
--- End quote ---
MortenMacFly:
--- Quote from: jens on December 31, 2012, 04:22:26 pm ---In this case an annoying dialog makes much more sense, than when using -g and -O2 together, which (in general) works.
--- End quote ---
For me it makes sense in both cases, as both can lead to unexpected behaviour which is worth a warning... but one you can easily disable as an expert. Remember: A lot classes / students use our IDE and not many - even way less experts. So again: Lets to a global "never show AnnoyingDialogs" option, and check all AD's if they are really unimportant for experts.
Then - when switching this option to "on", show an AD that you may miss some interesting stuff... ;D ;D ;D
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version