> That's what I am proposing: "Real toolchain support".
> That's not
> what you are using: "The attach-to-remote dialog".
>
Please understand I'm not just using that dialog box, I've created a project
file, included the source files, etc, I'm not building with creator but I
debugging with it invoking "Start & attach..."
>
> > that dialog box has 7 fields and the missing current
> directory gives
> > 8, there's nothing quick about a test that requieres a
> dialog box with
> > 8 fields in order to run...
>
> That's why it persists its contents. Trust me, this dialog
> does
> _exactly_ what it was meant for.
>
?? well, if I have a project loaded on the IDE my common sense tells me the
dialog that starts and attaches the app for remote debugging should load the
info related to the current project... It doesen't make sense to me having
loaded project XXX and remotelly start app YYY
> > >From an OO point of view I think IDE development
> should be project
> > >file centered, the main "object" when I work on my
> IDE is the project
> > >entity and I expect when I load/save my project,
> all the info related
> > >to my interaction with the object "myProjectXXX"
> be stored "within"
> > >the "object".... Splitting the concept of project
> and session on an
> > >IDE app does not sound as good design to me.
>
> Nobody forces you to accept this design, and you are
> certainly free to
> design _your_ IDE anyway you want, including, perhaps, a
> full Visual
> Studio clone.
>
Andre,
1) I hope you take my inpunt just as a constructive opinion even when it might
"somehow" criticize some part of qt-creator design... bottom line I love
qt-creator...
2) I'm not a Microsoft lover at all, but there are things on its IDE that are
well designed, even if they are "made in Microsoft". I think their "session"
approach is more confortable than creator's one
Pat
_______________________________________________
Qt-creator mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
