How about creating this class
Autsch! I try to avoid ambiguous class names as much as I can...
Ha! I agree - but this way may be the lesser of two evils. You could
put some code into the ("message") constructor to create a log record
of the stack and find where the offensive line of code is.
Or, of course, you could fire up search and replace with it's regex
expressions to replace all single-parameter occurrences with a ",0) at
On 18 February 2011 12:47, Mike Fechner
bleicher schrieb:I logged an internal enhancement request to track this discussion - CR OE00204761. - Evan
I logged an internal enhancement request to track this discussion - CR OE00204761.
Evan, can you already provide some information if that's actually going to make it into any future release?
I cannot provide any input concerning the next release (11.1) at this time. The task of reviewing the open enhancements and determining which will be included in the next release has not begun yet. This issue will be part of that discussion and it does have a very active community following. The Enhancement Request contains a link to this community forum so that the user communities comments can be easily seen during the review process.
At this time, it would be premature to state what will be included in a future release.
Sorry, I cannot be more definitive.
Sr. Development Manager
No problem! But it sounds there is some hope ...
One can always hope .... but it helps to have a lot of patience. How many years have I been asking for multi-threading and *finally* at PCA we heard that it was at least under consideration! Maybe by 12.x!
Consulting in Model-Based Development, Transformation, and Object-Oriented Best Practice http://www.cintegrity.com
One can always hope .... but it helps to have a lot of patience. How many years have I been asking for multi-threading and finally at PCA we heard that it was at least under consideration! Maybe by 12.x!
Many people have use cases for multi-threading. But I guess it's clear that this are two enhancements of totally different scope...
Yes, but being of smaller scope doesn't seem to necessarily mean that it is more likely to get implemented. Something big gets allocated resources when it becomes apparent that it is important, which is sometimes easier to do exactly because the impact is more apparent. Something small often has trouble sneaking in because all the resources have been allocated to things which are seen as more obviously important. Personally, I'd like to allocate a certain small percentage of resources to a small group ... even maybe just a single developer ... who would nibble away at a list of very small projects separate from the prioritized work. Obviously, we aren't going to get multi-threading that way, but I'll bet there we could come up with a list for each release that would bring out cheers from the Info Exchange audiences.