On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 1:45 PM, Keisuke Miyako via 4D_Tech < [email protected]> wrote:
> while I love discussing feature requests, You make a good point about feature requests, but I've got another point of view. Sometimes, it's better for 4D to implement a feature than for us to implement it. In the case of a meta-object/extended attributes for form objects, forms, fields, tables, etc., there are possible solutions already. Sure, you can write that sort of code. But here's the thing, to do that *you already have to have a pretty solid understanding of how to do that and why.* People that work exclusively in 4D aren't necessarily likely to already have that knowledge (how would they?) or to invent it (inventing stuff is hard and rare.) If its in the box, it's easy to sick your toe in, experiment with and go from there. Does 4D Engineering always get it right on figuring out what to prioritize. No, no they do not. Sometimes they give us totally awesome stuff I never would have thought to ask for, sometimes I'm left scratching my head. Sometimes they miss an opportunity. Do you know the first time I heard the idea of "local form variables" (what we have today with form object names) brought up? It was over 25 years ago. What if we *had* gotten that feature 25 years ago? How many people use it now that never even realized it was missing? Lots. At the time, the idea was mocked. (Not sure why, it always seemed like a good idea on the face of it.) I guess my (hopefully useful) point is that by implementing something nicely (like CALL PROCES, CALL FORM and C_OBJECT to a lesser degree), lots of people can take advantage of them. So, low price of admission for doing something useful and doing it well. Isn't that what 4D's all about? If the price is "you already have to understand this well enough to write it yourself in tools not quite written for that purpose" or "you have to write it using a plug-in", well, you don't really make 4D as good as it could be. Meta-objects/extended attributes/custom dictionaries are *fundamentally* useful and would make 4D *instantly* better for all developers, not just the developers with the background, time, and inclination to write their own system. Also, then you would have skill and code transferability between projects. A new developer can jump into a project and already know how to use extended attributes because it's a 4D feature, not a custom bit of code. Anyway, that's how I see it. If anyone needs a list of benefits of having little custom dictionaries extending 4D objects, it's probably better to do it over on an official feature request thread on the Forums in France. Here on the NUG, we're just talking. ********************************************************************** 4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG) FAQ: http://lists.4d.com/faqnug.html Archive: http://lists.4d.com/archives.html Options: http://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech Unsub: mailto:[email protected] **********************************************************************
