Vanceone wrote:I'm glad that "this me" was added; it's unfortunate the documentation doesn't say anything about it.
Yes, often the engine team will implement items that come from their own internal directives rather than as suggestions from users in the RQCC. IIRC "this me" was added by the lead engineer, Mark Waddingham.
Both "this" and "me" are documented in the Dictionary, and those who favored "this me" would suggest the pair of tokens is consistent with the use of each.
Just the same. I've added a request to have "this me" noted explicitly in the Dictionary entries for those tokens:http://quality.runrev.com/show_bug.cgi?id=14327
Unless you memorize the release notes for each build, or go back through the history you would never know!
When you read the Release Notes you'll find additions and modifications to the Dictionary included there. In general they've been doing a pretty good job of updating the Dictionary with new and modified tokens, but if you find something missing just file a report and it'll usually be added in the next build.
I was just wondering about the status of some of these discussions, since they seem to die away sometimes without much more than a "yeah, it's a great idea and we might or should do XXX" but no definitive word on if things were added or not. Sometimes things like "we added tentative code in branch YYYY" but nothing about whether it survived into final build status.
True, many times it's fun to explore new language directions but the conversation either doesn't yield a consensus on the proposed syntax, or no one finds it sufficiently interesting to log it in the RQCC.
Of course logging it in the RQCC is no guarantee it'll be implemented. If an idea has merit and fits in well with other language/feature development, often it will. But less critical proposals may take some time to be implemented, if at all, at least if the expectation is that the addition will be done by the core dev team at RunRev.
Many new features and enhancements were added by members of the community, so if there's something outstanding that would be a long-term interest for RunRev you could have it sooner by writing it yourself.
If something has been added, like in this thread
about ignoreMouseEvents, then maybe a brief final note like "Added in 6.7 final" and locking the thread might be appropriate? As it is, that thread notes that it was added in a development branch, but nothing about its final disposition.
If they wrote that it was added, that may have been sufficient for them. New items in the development branch may not appear in any current RC release (since those are in feature-lockdown), but will likely appear in the next feature release.
If real-time monitoring of the code base is of interest, Trevor put together a nice tutorial for using SourceTree for that:http://www.bluemangolearning.com/liveco ... -livecode/