So why this trip down memory lane? Lately I’ve been thinking a lot about IDEs and the ideal development experience.
#SERIAL CODE FOR ADOBE COLDFUSION BUILDER SERIES#
And when they then added Turbo C and Turbo Assembler and more to the mix, they had found a winning formula and they dominated the landscape (right before making a whole series of superbly dumb business decisions that effectively killed the company and thereby handed the lead on development tools to competitor Microsoft, but that’s a whole different topic). The beauty, the simplicity, the sheer elegance, Borland got it right. File and project manipulation, a real editor, integrated help, F9 to compile and any errors or warnings instantly identified in code, a profiler, even an integrated step-by-step debugger … all things we take for granted nowadays, but back then this was revolutionary. Aside from featuring a fun language and featuring lightning fast compilation (this was in 640K and 286 processor days), the real game changer was the development experience. Yes, I know I am dating myself now, but Borland’s Turbo Pascal was revolutionary.
This was over 20 years ago, and I was working on a personal project (a DOS based game), and picked up Turbo Pascal on the advice of a friend. 🙂 We can only hope they may speak up.I still remember the first time I discovered an IDE. More than anything, I’m sure you’d rather hear from Adobe. It’s not to be merely argumentative, but to help readers to see that there may be another take. But I do speak on their behalf as a fellow observer of things, sometimes offering a counterpoint to assertions some may make. We could expect that at least those would be attended to.)Īgain, I don’t speak for Adobe. (That’s not to deny that there are always bugs to be fixed.
#SERIAL CODE FOR ADOBE COLDFUSION BUILDER UPDATE#
While there may not have been an update in a while, it may be that there’s nothing compelling to update. I’m not aware that they have specifically STOPPED updating it. You are right that for those still using CFB2018, they would expect Adobe to update it. That said, there’s another (perhaps larger) segment who are just going about their day and not paying any attention to the timing of such things: they’ll look into it when it comes out, and until then they may not notice or care. I agree that prolonged silence is deadly to a segment of the community. Not making excuses: just sharing observations. Well, there are just situations where their transparency falls down, either when they don’t offer much of any at all (as in this case), or in the recent updates to CF20 (where they had a prerelease, but the updates that came out last week were not those we had been working with in the prerelease).īut then I can report also that there was very little activity/interaction from the community in the prerelease, so perhaps they are again feeling damned if they do, damned if they don’t. Maybe the delay means they WILL come out with something that WILL impress MOST of those who try it. Those who used it before will complain of what it lacks, while those who never used CFB will complain if it “barely does more than existing vscode CFML extensions”.Īdobe seems in kind of a damned-if-they-do-damned-if-they-don’t situation, at least with this first version. Indeed, I won’t be surprised if few are satisfied with the new CF Builder. That said, I suspect that MOST people never used even half the capability of that previous version. To that point, they did dampen our expectations by saying that we should not expect the first version to have anywhere near all the capability that the previous Eclipse-based edition did. Perhaps they are struggling with what to include in a 1.0 release vs what to hold for 1 1.1 or 1.2. 🙂 Perhaps it’s taking more effort than they originally expected. I don’t think we need “wonder”, but only to “wait”.
0 kommentar(er)
