T
Tim Kuehn
Guest
[quote user="Alex Herbstritt"] Although the ideas being put forward for extending the feature to allow sub-options that allow either errors and warnings are good, the discussion here is how we handle this in the immediate future. The 11.7 release will be the long term support for OE 11. We are now getting started on 12.0. Since there will be no more major changes for 11.7 in the service packs, we do not have the option of making a major feature upgrade there. Thus, this question is how to address this most simply as possible. For OE 12 we will be focusing on getting new options suggested by Community implemented and may not consider the sub-option concept for quite some time. [/quote] Alex - this kind of bureaucratic language has no place in Progress's operation. We are not talking about a "major change" here, we're talking about adding a check on an element of a CSV string for :ERROR or :WARNING, setting a flag, setting the flag to a default value if the :ERROR / :WARNING is not present, passing that flag to the compiler, and have that control the compiler's behavior. You guys messed up my mandating a 'one-size-fits-all' instead of implementing a configuration setting, and rather than fixing the mistake correctly you're asking if we want to make a different mistake by imposing a different one-size-fits-all that will eliminate the possibility of mandating that strict compiles are an absolute requirement in the future. One-size-fits-all was the wrong decision before FCS, it's the wrong decision now, and you need to fix it instead of mandating a different bad decision. The correct decision is to give the developers control of the behavior whether it's via an ERROR and :WARNING flag or some other mechanism.
Continue reading...
Continue reading...