S60 Open to new features

> So, if you have feedback on our tools, or the OS -- free freeback, or freedback as Chris says -- let us know. This blog is a good place to start.

Ok, you asked for feedback first.
Only single feedback item: Make the existing features work, before adding new features. Carbide.C++ builds aren't equal to the abld command line. And you know it. Fix it before adding the on device debugging, magic wizards, etc, etc

Thanks Artem -- We're aware that currently the build system still has some tweaks it needs before we can be happy with the quality; Our expectation is that this is a natural part of the development of the product, and that by the time the product is released, we've been able to remove any (known) issues with this.

That said, if you've come across any disparity issues between a Carbide.c++ and cmd line build, please let us know -- it's important info. If it contains confidential info, you can alternatively email your findings to beta.carbide@nokia.com

Cheers,

//markus

That said, if you've come across any disparity issues between a Carbide.c++ and cmd line build, please let us know -- it's important info

1. I maintain a Symbian Example web site. As you might have guessed a lot of the code examples published on the site are universal and can be compiled both for S60 2nd and S60 3rd edition.. from the command line. It drives me crazy, that I have to supply a separate mmp file if I want to use Carbide.

2. And then default Crabide settings tend to corrupt every mmp file, but the simplest. I can't get how comes that a clearly supplementary tool dares to change the project file as it was a main tool.

3. Why do you parse the mmp file at all? The best parsing you could possibly do is replicating of the Symbian build chain. If you don't replicate it you alays risk missing some preprocessing step. Have a look at how CodeWarrior imports Symbian projects. It looks like the whole decision to parse mmp files and rely on parsing completely was made in the very beginning of the project without any plan B available.

I am sorry for that abusive tone, but I can't refrain from it. Carbide.c++ is my biggest frustration of the year: a product that looked brilliant during the first trials and appeared to be a low-quality stuff during the everyday work. It looks like for some strange reason you had no link to the real world customer and decided to delay all the testing until the very latest phase (Ok, let's not go deep into it otherwise it will grow into the typical waterfall against agile arguing).

Actually, if you really want to get the developers' feedback, open-up the bug tracking system, like PyS60 team did. Blog comments work a way worse, than a bug tracking system

Artem,

I do developer support for CodeWarrior and Carbide and I'd like to go over this point-by-point with you. Please contact beta.carbide(a)nokia.com to be added to the beta program, and we can discuss further, via email or blog.

Regards,

Matt

First of all, sorry for the late reply, I was on my Summer vacation.

@Markus Ahonen
>> That said, if you've come across any disparity issues between a Carbide.c++ and cmd line build, please let us know

Markus, just download my Universal HelloExeDll or CleanupResetAndDestroyPushL example and try building them with Carbide. Both examples perfectly build both for 2nd and 3rd edition, but fail with Carbide, because Carbide ignores macros and.. well, since the BIG binary break in S60 3rd edition macros are a must if one wants to have a single code base for both old and new devices (and everybody wants).

@Matt Pinsonneault
>> I'd like to go over this point-by-point with you
I don't mind a public discussion at all. However, I don't think there is a lot of sense in discussing all the smallest frustration (that usually can be workarounded though in unpleasant way) before major flaws are fixed. My personal main problems are:
1) Carbide ignores macros in .mmp and bld.inf
2) Carbide messes up UID 0 that's perfectly ok. If I remember correctly it replaces 0 with 'NULL'
3) By default Carbide rewrites .mmp.. poor guy that doesn't have a backup.

>> I do developer support for CodeWarrior and Carbide and
>> I'd like to go over this point-by-point with you.

And by the way, I don't mind helping you, trying betas or something like this. However, I don't actually have the MS VC++ 2003, unless you grant me a license :)
I didn't use VC 2003 myself and downloaded the trial version only to check how Carbide copes with the code examples on my site. I am not sure how legal it is to download the same trial for the second time.

After the email discussion I figured out that my comments are actually related to the Carbide.vs, not to Carbide.c++.

Sorry for the confusion. Probably I just wanted to compain about the Carbide.vs too much..