I'm also not very keen on inlined error messages. I have the habit of
pressing Alt-s twice in rapid succession, the first time the red borders
disappears but I only notice the second time when the whole edit box flashes
(or perhaps I just have a need to double check anyway). This extra keystroke
seems to pay off against the frustration of debugging code I've forgotten to
save but you'll understand that things go badly wrong when the first Alt-s
generates an inlined error message.

Besides, having text inserted in your code can feel intrusive and having to
press delete before you can edit your code doesn't seem make much cognitive
sense. It's not that it's hard work, it's just the wrong kind of work!
There's also a bit of inconsistency in that using an undefined variable in
your code brings up a message box rather then an inlined message. Completely
logical, but inconsistent never-the-less.

Using inlined error messages seems to be the simplest solution to the
problem and as a proponent of Occam's razor, I can live with it. Somewhere
down the line we should look at better ways though, because as Einstein
warns:

"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."


Cheers,
Wiebe

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: Jim Benson [mailto:jb at speed.net]
> Verzonden: 13 May 2001 02:35
> Aan: squeak at cs.uiuc.edu
> Onderwerp: Re: Squeak textbox and events.

> I'll assume that you mean you have gotten an error message while
> compiling a
> method. Two things here. First, notice that the error is highlighted
> (selected). In order to delete the error message, a one kestroke
> sequence is
> required. Second, in order to recompile and save the code, you
> must fix your
> error, which will require you to edit the text. If you are going
> to edit the
> text anyway, an extra keystroke does not seem to be a major penalty.