On Apr 2, 2007, at 9:32 AM, Norman Palardy wrote: > On Apr 02, 2007, at 10:26 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> On Apr 02, 2007, at 16:22 UTC, Terry Ford wrote: >> >>> I wouldn't be surprised, however, if the version they use is a >>> modified (in-house only) version of 2007 much as 5.5.9 was. >> >> I would. Maintaining a modified version is expensive, and a PITA for >> the engineers. I can't think of any reason why they would >> continue to >> do that, when stock 2007r1 has all the features they need. > > I thought 5.5.9 (Grandpa) was mostly just different frameworks and > plugins and not actually a modified version of the IDE ? > That was my understanding from the conversations I've had with > REALengineers about this but that was about 2 years ago. > > I'd agree with you Joe that using a "special" version would be a PITA > in several respect and using a stock 2007rX release to build the next > one benefits REAL and it's users in many more ways than a special > version would.
This is pure speculation on my part, but wasn't there a comment at one time that one of the eventual goals of RS to permit some form of access to those "_" hidden methods in certain events built-in to RB? I may be totally misunderstanding this as I am going from memory and, at my age (60), I am beginning to wonder about it. :) When I suggested a different "in-house" version I was imagining how RS engineers would step through these methods when debugging Rb. Nonetheless, it is very comforting to know that the goal of developing RB with the previous release is a very reassuring sign. Terry _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
