Option to keep CLASS + name in XPorter output
Option to keep CLASS + name in XPorter output
Dick, what other real info are you looking for?
Chris Pyrgas
XSharp Development Team
chris(at)xsharp.eu
XSharp Development Team
chris(at)xsharp.eu
Option to keep CLASS + name in XPorter output
Dick,
Double click the error and you come to the offending line of code. Just like in the errors window of VO.
What else do you need ?
Robert
Double click the error and you come to the offending line of code. Just like in the errors window of VO.
What else do you need ?
Robert
XSharp Development Team
The Netherlands
robert@xsharp.eu
The Netherlands
robert@xsharp.eu
Option to keep CLASS + name in XPorter output
Hello Chris, Robert,
See the screenprint. VS only gives me the name of the .prg where the error occurs which is like the module in VO, I underlined this green for both. VO tells me the class and the method. VS does not.
I've right clicked which columns to show in VS but none seem to show me the class + method. Yes I can doubleclick to open it. But in VO I directly see where the error is. In VS, especially interesting in this conversion project, I have to click 154 times and search somewhere else in the screen to see where I am working in. This is one of the (many) reasons I still hate every second I work in VS.
Dick
See the screenprint. VS only gives me the name of the .prg where the error occurs which is like the module in VO, I underlined this green for both. VO tells me the class and the method. VS does not.
I've right clicked which columns to show in VS but none seem to show me the class + method. Yes I can doubleclick to open it. But in VO I directly see where the error is. In VS, especially interesting in this conversion project, I have to click 154 times and search somewhere else in the screen to see where I am working in. This is one of the (many) reasons I still hate every second I work in VS.
Dick
- Attachments
-
- VovsVSError.png (24.35 KiB) Viewed 291 times
Option to keep CLASS + name in XPorter output
Hi Dick,
True, this is a stepback from VO. But especially for Errors, why is it important to know in advance in which entity the error occurred? I could had easily made XIDE display this information, but I never felt the need for it, so never did it. Don't you need to go to the actual error location to fix it anyway?
Even VO does not show the code which has problem in the error information, you need to double click to go to this line and see exactly what the error is and fix it, I do not see how knowing the entity name in advance helps in any way.
(for search results this is a completely different story of course)
Chris
True, this is a stepback from VO. But especially for Errors, why is it important to know in advance in which entity the error occurred? I could had easily made XIDE display this information, but I never felt the need for it, so never did it. Don't you need to go to the actual error location to fix it anyway?
Even VO does not show the code which has problem in the error information, you need to double click to go to this line and see exactly what the error is and fix it, I do not see how knowing the entity name in advance helps in any way.
(for search results this is a completely different story of course)
Chris
Chris Pyrgas
XSharp Development Team
chris(at)xsharp.eu
XSharp Development Team
chris(at)xsharp.eu
Option to keep CLASS + name in XPorter output
Hello Chris,
Almost anything is a step back in VS but sometimes I overlook something.
I find it very important to see where something went wrong especially when I am working on something like this conversion; programs where things are wrong in multiple methods. In VO I can quickly asses that e.g. 30 errors are in one specific method which are probably solved all 30 with one or 2 code changes.
In VS, in this conversion project, I would need to double click on all 154 warnings and 72 errors to open code and make notes and count and in the end I estimate I am 30 minutes and 226 double clicks and lots of scrolling further before I know more or less what I know exactly in VO at one glance in the error screen.
Another example is when I decide to change a method or function, e.g. add a parameter to a strong typed function. I can see very quickly in VO what the impact is of this change, for example the function is used like 40 times but mostly in 3 or 4 methods. Then I know I can make the change quickly because I only need to test on 35 places if it all works as expected instead of 20 very different parts of the program.
Also add the fact that on opening a VS project it does not recall the number of errors and warnings without recompiling and I still have the situation: against 1 nice VS feature (like Peek definition, actually after some really hard thinking I couldn't produce anything else I liked in Visual Studio) there are a few dozen things I consider well below what has been present in VO since years.
Dick
True, this is a stepback from VO. But especially for Errors, why is it important to know in advance in which entity the error occurred?
Almost anything is a step back in VS but sometimes I overlook something.
I find it very important to see where something went wrong especially when I am working on something like this conversion; programs where things are wrong in multiple methods. In VO I can quickly asses that e.g. 30 errors are in one specific method which are probably solved all 30 with one or 2 code changes.
In VS, in this conversion project, I would need to double click on all 154 warnings and 72 errors to open code and make notes and count and in the end I estimate I am 30 minutes and 226 double clicks and lots of scrolling further before I know more or less what I know exactly in VO at one glance in the error screen.
Another example is when I decide to change a method or function, e.g. add a parameter to a strong typed function. I can see very quickly in VO what the impact is of this change, for example the function is used like 40 times but mostly in 3 or 4 methods. Then I know I can make the change quickly because I only need to test on 35 places if it all works as expected instead of 20 very different parts of the program.
Also add the fact that on opening a VS project it does not recall the number of errors and warnings without recompiling and I still have the situation: against 1 nice VS feature (like Peek definition, actually after some really hard thinking I couldn't produce anything else I liked in Visual Studio) there are a few dozen things I consider well below what has been present in VO since years.
Dick