Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [ptp-dev] Application tab behavior

> This might be best discussed on a bug and maybe it's been discussed in
> the past, but what are your thoughts on what should happen to other
> launch tabs if a user changes the target system configuration and/or
> host in the launch configuration dialog? For example, should the
> application tab clear it's fields? I ran into an instance where I had a
> launch configuration that I was using locally and I changed the target
> configuration and host, which made the application tab invalid. But,
> since it didn't clear the tab, I was able to launch the job (and fail)
> since the application was pointing to the wrong directory. Because the
> application tab is dependent on the resources tab, I would expect it to
> be checking to see if something has changed that would force it to need
> to clear it's fields. I suspect the Performance Analysis tab has the
> same issue in the profile launch configuration where it should probably
> invalidate it's selections (and isn't) when a host/target config change
> which could cause runtime issues.
>
> Should I open a bug on this or is this behavior the preferred?

I consider the launch tab to be a 'persistent' object in that when I create it the values are retained across Eclipse sessions. The only time it's values are changed is by me interacting with the launch configuration either through modifying a field explicitly or by making a "Revert" or reset request. So when I Duplicate a launch configuration I assume all the fields of the original are copied into the duplicate. When I create a new configuration I assume all the field are set to their default. So as I change one tab's values I do not expect any other values to change. Therefore if the Resource tab is changed to some other target system configuration I would not expect the Application, or Arguments, or Environment to change, that is, to be cleared or otherwise affected.  So bottom line it is not a bug and "this behavior is preferred" in my humble opinion. Naturally I'll be glad to listen to your or anyone else's counter arguments.


Back to the top