[Lazarus] properties (delphi does it wrong too) [Re: debugger feature request created]

[Martin]

Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
> 2009/10/2 Horacio Jamilis <hjamilis at pymesoft.com.ar>:
>   
>> May be, for people like you, in the debugger options page, could be an
>> option to disable this funcionatility for tooltip debugging or for all the
>> debugging, but this should be enabled by default.
>>
>> This is only my point of view.
>>     
>
> I fully agree. Delphi has that option by default and it is very handy.
> Yes you could have unexpected result, but that is up to you as a
> developer to know your own code.
>   
I agree, it is handy option. Well we have to wait till someone has time 
to do it, or someone contributes it.
> A option to disable such support could be handy for developers like
> Martin, but I am pretty sure most other developers would like that
> option enabled by default.
>   
It may be valuable for an experienced developper to have it on. From the 
little I remember of the days i first used delphi as a newbie. It would 
have been better if It had been off.

Just because of a lot of properties would crash half way through if 
something wasn't initialized. To explain this, at least when I was new, 
a lot of my code wouldn't have checks, if things are in the correct 
state, so it was very easy to crash it (well I was new to programming).

Today of course, my code is more stable, I know the risk, etc => I 
wouldn't be troubled by the feature. So I could enable it.
My view is, that once such a feature has been done/contributed, it 
should be disabled by default, but when you attempt to evaluate a 
property, you can be asked (with propper warnings) if you want to enable it.


----
Anyway I think I went of the path. It was not my intention to say that 
such a feature should not be done, of course it should. (Even though 
with different defaults).

The point that most annoyed me is the sub-tone some msg seemed to imply 
(and it was *not* Graeme's messages).
What is the point in "ranting" or "alleging" that it wasn't given 
priority, or that some one couldn't or wouldn't use Lazarus because of this?

No one is forced to use Lazarus. It's free, free to be used or not to be 
used, and free as in "no money charged".

Whoever contributes to it, does contribute what they feel they want to 
do. Because they do so in there spare and free time. (And more than 
often they do things people have ask for, rather than things they 
need/want for themself). This is the concept of contribution. How many 
people would spent there free time to it, if it would mean that some-one 
else acts as their boss, telling them what to do?


And to save the honour of graeme, he started 3 threads:
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/pipermail/lazarus/2009-September/045378.html
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/pipermail/lazarus/2009-September/045380.html
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/pipermail/lazarus/2009-September/045383.html

All three where basic question, if there was a way, and if so which way 
it was. Only the last one also expressed some "frustration" about the 
inaccessibility of the debug features.

Then later mails (other people) developped into statements like "The 
debugger is not usable as it does not have been in the focus to be 
developed. " or " lack elemental features that are waiting to be 
implemented and waiting and waiting and waiting and waiting"; And then 
soon saying this was a reason for people not to use Lazarus, or to move 
away from Lazarus.

This is neither true (the focus part, because there was and right now is 
development) nor does it help the discussion. If the debugger is not 
usable to someone, then go for the alternative. Spent some hundreds of 
dollars and buy delphi. No one is stopping you.
Saying that you will do so or have done so may or may not change the 
path of Lazarus development.  While I have observed big efforts by the 
Lazarus developper team to actually meet the requests of many users => 
The fact is: Doing so is voluntary, but not an ultimate requirement. 
Delphi must deliver what the users ask for, or else they make no money. 
Lazarus does make no maney anyway. Lazarus wants to deliver, but it does 
not have to.

And if it takes long, Well anyone can contribute. Some brought up the 
convenient argument they don't know about the internals of debugging. 
Well you do not need to. Intact the very first patches I sent to Lazarus 
where about debugging, and I knew nothing. GDB is well documented on the 
net. The Lazarus part of controlling GDB is well separated from the 
rest, so it is easy to learn too.


Just my opinion
Martin