Version 1.4 loaded

[Garyhlucas]

Just installed 1.4. Wow lots of stuff in there!  This product reminds me of Rhino 3D. It improved really fast with a very active newsgroup and most power users actually running beta code.

Thanks guys,

[Mike Nash]

Just installed 1.4. Wow lots of stuff in there!  This product reminds me of Rhino 3D. It improved really fast with a very active newsgroup and most power users actually running beta code.

Thanks guys,

Well I am feeling excluded. Some kind of Inside Track Member? 

[Controls Guy]

No, 1.4.1 is the current DMD version linked on Host's main page.  Must have just gone up in the last day or two.  Been meaning to check and see when it was available!   

[Controls Guy]

Hmmmm... .....spoke too soon.  The link says it's for v1.4.1, and the release notes show what's in it, but the linked page at ADC just shows 1.3.1.  And...if you assume the naming convention for the files is consistent and the file is probably actually there and try to download http://ftp.automationdirect.com/pub/domore_v141.zip, it's not there.

[Mike Nash]

I finally realized you just have to open DMD and it finds the updates and allows you to download and install. Just released today and I saw the same things you did.

Well crap. All of my customizations from 1.3.1 are missing in 1.4.1.

[Controls Guy]

Ah OK, thanks!

[BobO]

Well crap. All of my customizations from 1.3.1 are missing in 1.4.1.

Sorry. All of the customizations are still possible, they just have to be set up in the new world. When we went to side-by-side installations, the INI files became version specific. Still, I thought we propagated stuff from one install to the next, but apparently not. Guess we can look at doing better on that in the future.

Hopefully the new 1.4 features will make it worth a few minutes of setting your world back up.

[Controls Guy]

Oh, you're not kidding!  The Memory view alone (and you rocked yours with tons of stuff AB's and Omron's versions don't do) would be worth setting things up again.  Then being able to DEVWRITE POP server addresses is totally indispensable if you need it, and I do.  Just reading through the release notes PDF.  The EIP master and slave is huge, too.  TONS of great stuff here.  Thanks, Hosties!!

[Controls Guy]

I noticed that the "Necessary-LD-ST1" issue has been slightly addressed (dialog message asks whether you want to add the thing or merge the rungs).  I don't think this is as good as assuming an implicit one and not showing it.  Is that still in the plans as was previously thought?  I'd MUCH prefer that.  Less keystrokes, less irrelevant stuff to read, and less screen clutter.

[Controls Guy]

Having Print All not forget B/W setting is a biggie for me, too.  Thanks!   

[BobO]

I noticed that the "Necessary-LD-ST1" issue has been slightly addressed (dialog message asks whether you want to add the thing or merge the rungs).  I don't think this is as good as assuming an implicit one and not showing it.  Is that still in the plans as was previously thought?  I'd MUCH prefer that.  Less keystrokes, less irrelevant stuff to read, and less screen clutter.

Having an instruction that is there, but isn't there, until you really do need it to be there, etc, etc, becomes a bug trap. We wanted to deal with the issue, without creating five new ones. Perfect? No. But at least it doesn't do something without warning you, leaving you scratching your head.

[Controls Guy]

Yeah, but I still have to look at the thing, which has no meaning.  Just mental and visual clutter.  I guarantee you not 1 in a 1000 people look at the ladder view as a 100% literal view of the stack instructions.  I-Boxes are non-literal, this could be just as well.

Entering it was never the problem, looking at it was.

[Mike Nash]

Well crap. All of my customizations from 1.3.1 are missing in 1.4.1.

Sorry. All of the customizations are still possible, they just have to be set up in the new world. When we went to side-by-side installations, the INI files became version specific. Still, I thought we propagated stuff from one install to the next, but apparently not. Guess we can look at doing better on that in the future.

Hopefully the new 1.4 features will make it worth a few minutes of setting your world back up.

I probably should have said "Well shoot" instead. I pretty much figured I would have to do them over from previous threads. I like how the toolbars are all up there from the get go. Quite frankly, the large icons really look nice and it's a shame I need the space for everything else a bit more.

I have to admit that while I have the same toolbar style on all three 1.3.1 installs, I didn't manage to get the buttons in the same place for any of them.

The real shame is I have to hit the sack as I have a long road trip tomorrow and I don't get to play with it. 

[BobO]

Yeah, but I still have to look at the thing, which has no meaning.  Just mental and visual clutter.  I guarantee you not 1 in a 1000 people look at the ladder view as a 100% literal view of the stack instructions.  I-Boxes are non-literal, this could be just as well.

Entering it was never the problem, looking at it was.

Having a single IBox represent n opcodes is easy. Having 1 opcode disappear when it should, and the same opcode not disappear when it shouldn't, is problematic. I know that you don't like it, I don't either. But I also know that you would like it even less if it became the bug trap it could be.

Put another way (and one of my favorite sayings here at Host) "I would rather apologize to 20% of the customers for what I chose not to do, than to apologize to 100% for what I did poorly".

And for what it's worth, we really didn't do it to solve the issue you are trying to solve. We did it for the new guy who has no clue what manner of witchcraft is sucking his stuff up into the previous rung. Meaning, we could keep a case around to revisit it in the future.

[Controls Guy]

Having a single IBox represent n opcodes is easy. Having 1 opcode disappear when it should, and the same opcode not disappear when it shouldn't, is problematic. I know that you don't like it, I don't either. But I also know that you would like it even less if it became the bug trap it could be.

Oh I see, you're saying that people sometimes use a NO ST1 intentionally to jump around something, so now you'd have to check if it's the first opcode on the rung, etc., etc.  Understood.  Maybe there needs to be a new ST bit that's equivalent to ST1 and a LD STxx always disappears?  If you put it in the middle of a rung, it turns into a wire and gives the short circuit error as if you'd drawn the wire manually?  Or a new opcode like RSS (ReSet Stack), and ALL rungs start with it.  That way the show/don't show decision doesn't become a dilemma.

And for what it's worth, we really didn't do it to solve the issue you are trying to solve. We did it for the new guy who has no clue what manner of witchcraft is sucking his stuff up into the previous rung.

The new behavior does address that scenario very well.

Meaning, we could keep a case around to revisit it in the future.

Thanks, that would be much appreciated!