What would be really useful is an indicator of when a certain feature or option was added into the language.
for example, I came across Progress.Lang.OEVersionInfo today. This looks quite useful, but I don't remember if this was available in 10.2B or not. Or 10.1C .
It would be handy if the docs were to say:
Progress.Lang.OEVersionInfo class (11.0)
Javascript style "feature detection" would be pretty handy too.
No it wouldn't.
urrghh. As to prove a point, does anyone know when the SERIALIZE-ROW method was implemented ?
when the SERIALIZE-ROW method was implemented ?
It's NOT in to 10.2B online help - but IS in the OE11 online help. Maybe that helps you make a guess...
right. Implemented in 10.0A then
thanks. It's a pita having to do this.
On 20 February 2012 08:46, Mike Fechner
jmls wrote:
right. Implemented in 10.0A then
thanks. It's a pita having to do this.
On 20 February 2012 08:46, Mike Fechner
It is, but you can get the big picture from the "New and Revised Features" doc that ships with most (all?) versions. It may not specifiy this at the property/attribute level.
How important is this information? If you're bug-fixing on 10.2B (say) you at least compile on that version before shipping the patch even if you're not shipping r-code, right?
-- peter
If I see a attribute / method / function / statement that looks "cool"
to use, rather than having to then get out the "new and revised
features" pdf, it just would be nice to see a "implemented in" note.
I am currently only working on 11.0. I don't have 10.2B installed.
Yeah, yeah, I know. I should install it.
Fair enough. I don't know whether this information is explicitly captured anywhere (as opposed to implicitly as found by a diff between doc sets); you should probably log an enhancement request for this behaviour though.
You only really need the 'hard stop' of compilation against the earlier before it goes to QA, since the behaviour is unlikely to change for existing stuff (go ABL! ).
-- peter
It isn't captured anywhere (except maybe in George Potemkin's brain). I
suspect it would be fairly difficult for us to produce this kind of
information from the internal documents we have. The "what's new" documents
are not always sufficiently detailed.
Which is exactly why "feature detect" would be so very nice.