Changes between Version 40 and Version 41 of ReviewHeuristicLab3.3.0Application

Timestamp:

03/18/10 10:58:51 (14 years ago)

Author:

abeham

Comment:

cleanup, reprioritization and answered some comments

ReviewHeuristicLab3.3.0Application

@@ -7 +7 @@
 === Priority: HIGH ===
  * The operator graph view is a bit confusing:
-   * The successor parameter reads "Successor: !ResultsCollector", "Successor: !SubScopesSorter", ... It's more readable if "Successor" was not present all the time (in the operator graph group box).
-     * swagner: "Successor" is required to identify an operator parameter. Of course, in the case of `ResultsCollector`, `SubScopesSorter`, etc. there is only one operator parameter, but there are other operators which have multiple operator parameters (e.g. branches). If we skip the parameter name, the user will not be able to tell which operator parameter is shown in the tree view.
    * The flow chart is very nice, but sometimes arrows are a bit wild and going backwards which creates a not so nice strikethrough appearance. Would be good to have non-direct arrows as well.
      * swagner: In a discussion with maffenze it was decided to address this issue after the release of HeuristicLab 3.3.0.
  * Adding a `ValueParameter<T>` in a `VariableCreator` and selecting a generic type e.g. `ItemList<T>` fails because no choice can be made on the generic type of the `ItemList` (ticket #42).
  * Even when a control is not displayed (e.g. the global scope tab) its view is updated which costs a lot of time. The optimization runs noticeably faster (~2x) when HeuristicLab isn't the active application in Windows (at least in Win7).
+ * All Parameters have the same icon, can we have different ones for values and operators?
 
 === Priority: MEDIUM ===
@@ -19 +18 @@
    * Would be nice to be able to view a "scatter plot" of the coordinates.
    * `BestKnownTour` is missing as parameter.
-   * All Parameters have the same icon, can we have different ones for values and operators?
- * The view host icon should act like a button that when single-clicked opens the context-menu, when hovering over it, there should be a frame around it like a button so that it's clear that it can be clicked.
-   * swagner: When hovering over the view host icon a tool tip is displayed that explains how the different views can be selected.
- * In my user defined algorithm:
-   * I have added an SGAOperator and set it as initial operator. I added crossover, mutation, evaluation and selection: `ProportionalSelector` has a Parameter "!CurrentScope" that cannot be changed in any way, is there a necessity to display this parameter?
-     * swagner: The scope parameter "!CurrentScope" indicates that the current scope (i.e. its sub-scopes) is manipulated by an operator. It is shown in order to give the user comprehensive information about what an operator does. Maybe this is not really helpful. Should I remove scope parameters in general? In the code of an operator they are not really required, as the current scope can always be accessed via the current execution context.
-     * swagner: In a discussion with maffenze it was decided to keep scope parameters.
  * When clicking "start" to start the engine disabling of the user interface elements has similar problems to what we fixed a few revisions ago (ticket #887)
  * In the operator graph chart view:
    * The vertical scroll bar allows scrolling way past the graph.
+    * abeham: On second review, this isn't actually an issue.
    * Long operator names require higher shapes as the operator name breaks into the next line.
    * Scrolling using the mouse wheel looks very odd, if this can't be fixed it better should be disabled.
@@ -42 +35 @@
  * Focus is not removed from a textbox if one clicks anywhere in the "gray" area.
    * swagner: This is the behavior of Windows Forms.
+    * abeham: I mentioned this because I want to validate the control by clicking out of the text box and thus losing the focus. Maybe this can be achieved by allowing focus on the control or form. I think by default the "gray area" doesn't accept focus.
  * There should be a nicer way of saying the chart controls are not installed instead of an exception.
    * swagner: The HeuristicLab setup will check if the Microsoft Chart Controls are installed and will show a meaningful error message.
@@ -59 +53 @@
  * Resetting the engine doesn't update the global scope details view (user defined algorithm).
  * `TypeSelector` view: Focus should be in the search field when opening it the first time
- * `TypeSelector` view: Make double click select type and ok
+  * abeham: Actually I like it on the ok button, but also because it's a fast way of auto-oking those single option cases (see above)
  * `VariableCreator` throws an exception when injecting a variable whose value is null
+ * The view host icon should act like a button that when single-clicked opens the context-menu, when hovering over it, there should be a frame around it like a button so that it's clear that it can be clicked.
+   * swagner: When hovering over the view host icon a tool tip is displayed that explains how the different views can be selected.
+    * abeham: I'm still not fully happy with the view host icon, but it's probably the least priority thing right now
+ * Some operators have a Parameter "!CurrentScope" that cannot be changed in any way, is there a necessity to display this parameter?
+  * swagner: The scope parameter "!CurrentScope" indicates that the current scope (i.e. its sub-scopes) is manipulated by an operator. It is shown in order to give the user comprehensive information about what an operator does. Maybe this is not really helpful. Should I remove scope parameters in general? In the code of an operator they are not really required, as the current scope can always be accessed via the current execution context.
+  * swagner: In a discussion with maffenze it was decided to keep scope parameters.
+   * abeham: I think more parameter are just more confusing and description of the internal mechanisms of an operator are better displayed in the description text. I'll vote for removal of the current scope parameters, but I'll move this to low priority for now.
+     
 ----