Re: plea! (was Re: Two enhancement requests)
Re: plea! (was Re: Two enhancement requests)
- Subject: Re: plea! (was Re: Two enhancement requests)
- From: Scott Tooker <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 9 May 2005 00:37:28 -0700
On May 9, 2005, at 12:04 AM, Roy Lovejoy wrote:
On May 8, 2005, at 11:35 PM, Scott Tooker wrote:
You guys do know that you would gain 100% mindshare if you
offered as complete a "virtual codewarrior" as you could..
(alternate UI/ window grouping/key binding etc)
See below but we actually do both of these :)
well.. perhaps that's where an XCode person may look at the work
and say "wow, this portion is so unlike XCode, it must be like
Codewarrior".. but a person who uses Codewarrior 14 hours a day
goes "What's this supposed to be like again??"
Hey if you have suggestions for making things like the Condensed
layout and the key bindings better for CodeWarrior users, by all
means file bugs, the more concrete the better. Also, pointing out
places that Xcode seems to be different just to be different is
useful, though at this point, Xcode has been out long enough that we
have an established base of users to consider.
despite all the way-cool _engineering_ features in XCode, and the
hand-glove fit of IB/Cocoa/XCode, to a majority of Codewarrior
folk, XCode just feels... 'wrong' to a "project thinking"
developer..
I find these comments ironic since we modeled our current groups &
files hierarchy on the CodeWarrior model (i.e. you can have groups
that are totally divorced from the file system and organize your
sources with them). However, we've also gone beyond the basic
groups and files models to provide other features like folder
references (the ability to have an item that refers to a folder),
smart groups, filtering in the detail view, variant groups to
organize localized files, etc.
Well.. it could be ironic if either the mark was completely missed,
or there's a mode that this project was put in that made the group
hierarchy invisible..
I'm hoping it was the latter.. (indeed, that's what I thought I had
heard), but I'm a firm believer in playing with an interface,
usually recursively, to try to visit the features, and I can't see
how to see a "groups & files" hierarchy..
I think we are suffering from semantic problems here. In the default
Xcode 2.0 layout the "Groups & Files" view is the outline on the left
side of the project window. The actual groups & files hierarchy is
located underneath the project item in the outline view. What can be
confusing is that there are also root level items that represent
Targets, Executables, Bookmarks, SCM, and smart groups (the purple
folders with a gear on them).
To get an even more "Codewarrior"-like experience, close all open
projects. bring up the "General" prefs pane and select "Condensed"
from the 'Layout' popup on the left. Now open a project. You should
notice a difference :)
If I do a search for "Codewarrior" in XCode help, nothing comes up..
Try the same search in the more general documentation window. Doing a
Full-Text Search there reveals quite a lot, including "Xcode from a
CodeWarrior Perspective".
File a bug on the fact that we don't reference this file anywhere in
the Xcode help that is found via a search.
"Files in a Project" shows the "Soruces" "Headers" etc.. 'flat'
conglomeration..
are what you are referring to called "Smart Groups"..
Nope, normal groups look like manila folders, references to folders
are blue (like the folders in the Finder), and smart groups are
purple (think iTunes and Mail).
If you've gone to the trouble of modeling groups & files hierarchy
on a Codewarrior model, it would be nice if a Codewarrior user
could navigate the feature..
(Is this called 'Smart Groups'??).
As we improve Xcode, we are trying to find the balance between
making things familiar and making things work the "right" way.
Part of this is providing ways to make the experience easier for
those coming from CodeWarrior or other environments. However, the
other part is making sure that Xcode provides the best workflow
possible, and if that means doing things differently from other
IDEs (when it matters), then that's what we'll do. And I'm sure we
will hear from our developers about it, for good or bad :)
Don't ever think for a moment that I claim a 'right' way or a
'wrong' way.. I'm just talking muscle memory here..
If XCode can do 'XCode' way, and 'Codewarrior' way, then I would
think all would be happy in C/C++ land..
I guess it would be nice to see in the online documentation, (if
trademarks permit), if there would be a liberal sprinkling of "In
Codewarrior, this would be [foo], and it would look like [bar.jpg]".
I think a better tack might be a separate "CodeWarrior User's Guide
to Xcode" document that focused on the similarities/differences
between Xcode and Codewarrior. Similar documents describing
transitions from other IDEs (Visual Studio, Eclipse, makefiles, etc.)
would be good too.
To sum up, we are always interested in feedback about how to make
Xcode a better product and more accessible and familiar to
developers.
That is *VERY* reassuring.. Seriously.. Long term, career wise,
reassuring.
However, we aren't interested in replicating any given IDE's UI/
workflow as an end in itself.
understood..
After all if Xcode works just like "X", why not just use "X"?
Umm.. isn't that the echoing mantra of ghosts-of-command-line/intel-
platforms-past???
an admirable goal would be to *inclusively* bring *all* of the Mac
developers into the Apple/XCode fold, not issue the 'my way, or the
high-way' marketing bullet item..
I think you misinterpret my intent. I'm not looking to force "the one
workflow" on anyone (and we've gone to a LOT of effort in Xcode 2.0
to provide a number of choices in this regard, just checkout the 3
different layouts we provide), but at the same time Xcode needs to
have it's own sense of self. At it's core there needs to be a
structure and design that is distinctly Xcode and not just a carbon
copy or mismash of other IDEs.
Scott
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden