to say the IDE has ALWAYS been one of GMs strengths in one breath and then say folk are saying its FAR better than 1.4 and that isn't saying much is contradictory in the extreme.
An IDE isnt all good or all bad.
Being able to quickly edit any resource in the same IDE package is nice. Thats a + for all GM IDEs.
Having a bunch of windows was not so great. Thats a - for 1.X
Having a workspace system is (in my opinion) better than lots of windows, but not as good as a tabbes system.
So, yes, the IDE now is much better than 1.X IDE, because 1.X had many problems.
But it remains true that it was nice to have everything in a single package.
As i said, not black and white.
The chains show context, ownership and code flow (where appropriate).
I think thats the problem i have with chains: they show too many different things.
At first, i though they showed ownership. That makes a lot of sense. But then i realised i could middle click on a script in the code editor, and it would open the script with a link. Now its showing code flow, not ownership.
This is, in my opinion, poor design as it can lead to ambiguities.
Showing code flow isnt all that useful either, since we already have that information in the code...
I also dont undestand why chains would be the best way to represent the information: lets take objects as an example:
They can only ever have one, and only one, set of physics options, one set of events, etc. this infomation could be conveyed by having them be in the same panel. Having them be attached with chains seems like an excuse to use chains.
Why not have a larger object panel, with all the physics, etc. if you want to hide them, you collapse the sub panel, making the object panel smaller...
I also find that many resources do not make use of the chain workflow. Then you end up with floating windows, just like in 1.X. The difference being now you can not only loose you windows by moving them somewhere, you can also loose them by moving the view, or even by opening a new window that will push everythg around.
The solution to this has oftne been to use the quick find feature, (alt + t or ctrl + t or something), but this defeats the point of the workspace. As soon as you start using this, you are no longer navigating the workspace, you are essentially bringing up windows. Something that could have been added to 1.X.
In fact, im pretty sure someone could write a script to do that in 1.X.
In fact, looking at
@Mike s streams, you only use the resource tree to find your resources. You make 0 use of the workspace.
But you constantly collapse every panel to make room for the chains and extra window borders. Loosing valuable time.
Basic Ui design teaches us every time we open a panel or window, we spend time studying it. This is why many IDEs opt to have the projects explorer constantly open, since it is someting you will need to access often.
I also want to voice my opinion on the surveys that where taken in early beta. They asked for first impressions, and seemed to fish for positive feedback. (Or at least, thats how i felt taking them).
As i stated before, the first impressions you are going to get from the workspace system are undoubtebly gonna be positive ones. Its good looking, and seems to have a lot to offer.
But once you get used to it, you see that the information provided is of very little use... but the questionairs never get that far.
I realize the whole workspace thing will probably not go away, after all, it seems like YYG have put a lot of effort into finding ways to make use of it (like the excesive chains with objects, or opening new chained code windows evrytime you want to go to a script). It shows you really care about it. I just wonder why.