Developer forums (C::B DEVELOPMENT STRICTLY!) > Development

"Targets" v. "Projects" and (attached|workspace) property sheets

<< < (3/5) > >>

killerbot:
Wooooops, who turned the heat on in here.

Seems like "targets vs projects" could be an endless discussion (well Yiannis and I had a minor one on that issue to). It's as Yiannis says, you (nearly) can have it several ways, so that's good.
What we do need though (IIMHO) : some examples in the wiki where we show the possibilities of those different ways of doing it, since we all want CB to rock hard, and then it will get new users coming from the Visual Studio audience. I also use VS a lot, but I prefer to work in CB, I miss things in CB, but I am willing to wait for them to arrive ;-)
No no, no copy of VS to be CB, only take the good parts and doing it better. So we have to show those users how the ncan work the VS way, and the alternative ways.

A suggestion I would like to make is can't we create 1 post (yes just 1), where 1 moderator manages the first post and can optionally remove the reply posts, hmm, now what could that post be :
"(future) Feature ideas for the next version(s) of CB". So everyone can reply with an idea, no discussion of the idea (linkt to another topic in the forum for that), and the moderator maintaines the list of those ideas in the first post.
So it's far from a roadmap, but it's some sort of wishlist.
What's the benefit of this : 1 place to look for alread mentioned ideas (search the forum might be troublesome).
Note : the words "future versions", might be 1.1, 2.0, or even the next headrevision.

What do you think ?

I have tried the same for the community patches, but that one is not catching on yet, just entries from some dude killerbot  8)

There's no doubt that together we will lift this project on a higher level, stop and think : we already do this, every day again and again.


Cheer,
Lieven

PS : still looking forward to the first big CB convention for developers and users .... dream dream dream .... sigh ....



EDIT : Yiannis just also posted a reply at the same time : we better stick to the over and out.

280Z28:

--- Quote from: mandrav on December 29, 2005, 11:31:44 pm ---I just deleted a long post I wrote to answer. You know why? It's not worth it.
I 'm not gonna argue with you. I have more important things to do than having a dispute through the internet.
Feel free to think that I attacked you. I didn't but hey, what you think is more important to you. You 're entitled to your opinion, as I am to mine.

Over and out.

--- End quote ---

I actually want to know what you think of the idea of attachable properties as a whole. Even if we don't use them for the Code::Blocks project file, do you think support for them should eventually be added?

What about a modification (addition) to the policy combobox? How do-able is an idea like that?

280Z28:
@mandrav: From here on out, I'm going to interpret your posts with the assumption that you don't make posts to attack me (but you can disagree with my ideas, that is absolutely fine). You reply with a different style than I do, but we're good now since you have clearly stated that you aren't attacking me. On that issue, I won't bring it up again.  8)

@thomas: Are you in on this as well? Just say the word and I'll do the same for you. :)

rickg22:
280: I have a better idea. It's WAY TOO LATE to modify the compiler framework by now. But I've noticed your (sometimes overzealous :P ) excitement and desires to improve it.

Fear not: You're invited to collaborate on the COMPILER FRAMEWORK REDESIGN! :D

Thomas and I came up with the idea today. If we start now, we might be able to have it completed by next June.

The idea starts with this: A cbVariant class. It will hold either a bool, an int, a char, a float, or a wxString. Comparison and assignation will be done through operator overloading. A special InvalidVariant object will be used for invalid values.

The idea further expands with a map<wxString, cbVariant, less<wxString> >. This is also known as an associative array.

My goal is to make a "universal" (recursive) configuration object that will be able to serialize all of its properties. What do you think? I'll create a new forum for the whole redesign issue.

Michael:

--- Quote from: rickg22 on December 30, 2005, 12:19:11 am ---The idea further expands with a map<wxString, cbVariant, less<wxString> >. This is also known as an associative array.

--- End quote ---

Sorry rick for the remark, but it would not be better to use a generic comparator instead of less? I mean, if you would like to change later and using, e.g., greater<wxString>, then it would be easier to do.

Michael

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page