Re: Re: nb 4.0 question/comment

I've cc'd nbui into this discussion.

John Jullion-Ceccarelli wrote:

> Since it's hard to guess when the user wants to reuse the tab and when 
> they don't, we could just add a Keep Open checkbox to the tabs that 
> the user could check when they don't want the tab to be cleared.

I don't think extra eye candy is needed.   I think the following would 
be workable.

1) have compiles happen in a compile tab in the output window.  I don't 
know why one wants to mix up the output of compiles with the output of 
running classes anyway or otherwise have a compile "harvest" output tabs. 

2) have the execute action do what it does now, however useless that is...

3) have a new "execute in new output tab that can't be reused be 
anything" action.   I'll give it my own keybinding...

Right now I'm willing to settle for just about anything that doesn't 
throw away the output tabs wholesale, otherwise I need to find a new 
ide.   I just came across another insanity:  I run a class 5 times in 
quick sequence.   Each invocation takes ~10 seconds to compute some 
result.  I make some code changes in the class during which the 5 
invocations all complete in 5 tabs.    I hit F9 to compile my changes, 
and all the 5 output tabs are destroyed.   I simply don't see how anyone 
can think that this is an acceptable behavior under any circumstance.


> Jesse Glick wrote:
>
>> Alan Stange wrote:
>>
>>> [...] It's insanity to me though to think the ide should ever clear 
>>> and reuse a tab from running class A for compiling anything, or 
>>> running class B. The only thing that should happen is to clear and 
>>> reuse a tab from a prior execution of the same class. [...]
>>
>> This was exactly how it worked earlier in the 4.0 dev cycle and it 
>> was nightmarish to use in typical cases; you would fill up the output 
>> window with a lot of junk. It seems there are isolated cases where 
>> turning off auto reuse would be useful - e.g. for output from the 
>> kinds of programs Alan seems to be running. Feel free to file an RFE 
>> for such an option. It's after UI freeze for 4.0 but at least a 
>> system property could be introduced for this in 4.0 I guess.
>
I must be missing something.   How can the behavior for the output tabs 
I described be nightmarish for (your) typical use?  What typical use are 
you doing that you're getting so many tabs in the model I've proposed?  
We clearly have a disagreement over the meaning of "typical use".


Anyway, the data loss in the output tabs is so bad as to make nb4.0 near 
useless for me and my current typical usage.  Yes, I can open a terminal 
window or otherwise come up with a workaround, but what's the point of 
that?   I've been an nb user for 3 years and now the tool has been made 
useless over something so trivial...

-- Alan