04-01-2013, 08:32 PM
(04-01-2013, 04:03 PM)ggaliens Wrote: Well ... I would imagine that other folks might be more forgiving. ...
You . have . really . got . to . be . kidding.
If this response is associated with today's date ... then you got me good and proper ... if not, loop back to the first sentence.
At no time ... repeat no ... have I ever heard a comment such as this from any other dev associated with wings, when discussing feature implementation.
Over the last 11+ yrs that I've had some interaction with devs (mainly offline) about features has there ever been any suggestion of any degree of 'settling for' ... anything.
In the early days of wings, when I started reporting bugs / issues etc, I felt bad about this ... as if always complaining about stuff to the guys that were doing the actual work ... until Bj (and others) said that's the only way to get things right.
Since then ...the rest is history ... as they say
(04-01-2013, 04:03 PM)ggaliens Wrote: ... and sorry took so long to get here.
Much of what's going on / being said now has been covered before - several times - both specifically with reference to Booleans - and generally with respect to overall implementation and quality control aspects of same.
Personally, I suspect many / most users would be satisfied with the presence of the 3 main options - bug and issue free - accessed as per 'wings way / oort's suggestion - but coded in such a way as to allow the addition of the other 2 options sometime in the future, in a relatively seamless / painless manner.
pp