Hello Nexeed development team, I have two suggestions regarding OES/CPS that I would really like fulfilled in future versions: 1) When declaring a struct or enum at a unit in the model tree, it will pretty much always have a name like <UnitName><SemanticName><Struct/Enum>, for example the ParImm struct of my Module1 ModeHandler will be called Module1ParImmStruct. First of all, when I add a new structure or enum, maybe it can be called "Module1NewStruct"/"Module1NewEnum" by default, instead of "Structure" and "newEnum". That will help people stick to the coding guidelines. Bonus points if the new structure name is already in edit-mode (as if I pressed F2) and the cursor is at the right position between Unit name and type suffix, then no need to insert "New" in the default name. What's next, when such a type is added to another one, e.g. I drag+drop my Module1ParImmStruct to Module1Unit, it is automatically called "ParImm" instead of "InstOfModule1ParImmStruct". If it starts with the unit name, strip it, if it ends in Struct or Enum, strip it, if nothing is left (because the user chose a weird type name) just call it InstOfX like before. Bonus points: If the remaining name of the new member starts with Par, give it the Parameter direction property Input, if it starts with Out then give it Output direction. Although this is quite debatable I think. 2) I often review software or need to debug some software from somebody else. Understanding the model tree is easy because I can just look at it. What is giving me a little trouble are the add-ons, because it is easy to miss if people randomly add them to deeply nested command handlers where I did not suspect them. If possible, could we please have a small icon next to the handlers in the model tree that depict if it has any add-ons attached to it? Bonus points: Make it a smaller number 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, or * to indicate the numbers, the asterisk (or some other character) meaning more than 9. Add-ons are an important part of each model tree, but they are completely invisible in the nice graphical overview that the project explorer provides. I would love to see that change. In general such behavior could also be modifiable in the OES/CPS settings. At the moment there is almost no customizability of OES. While this is good for things that affect project standardization, when it comes to usability aspects I think it's perfectly fine to allow users to change such behavior. Just some food for thought. What is everybody else thinking? If you like these new feature suggestions, please show your support so we maybe get it implemented 😛 If you have other suggestions, please feel free to add.
... View more
