I am testing the current SE V19 release candidate - released 2014.10.28.
I have attached a test module (...test_04..) - to test user defined macro
load/unload operations.
When I FIRST (1) loaded Test_04 (attached) Dialog [A] and [ B] (below) seemed OK.
(1) Load State : Test_04 Module loaded
[A] SE Menu -> Macro -> List User-Loaded Macros (dialog OK)
[ B] SE Menu -> Macro -> Unload Module (dialog OK)
(2) Load State : Test_04 Module UNloaded
[A] SE Menu -> Macro -> List User-Loaded Macros (dialog OK)
[ B] SE Menu -> Macro -> Unload Module (dialog OK)
The first time through : 1.A,B and 2.A,B seemed consistent.
--------------------------
I cycled Test_04 several times to ensure repeatablility (of the test) -
and ran into some problems (or what appears to me to be problems).
In a nutshell - After the First test run - Test_04 no longer showed up on dialog [A].
[1.A] SE Menu -> Macro -> List User-Loaded Macros (Bad : dialog does NOT list Test_04)
Even though Test_04 shows up on dialog [ B].
[1.B] SE Menu -> Macro -> Unload Module (Good : dialog DOES list Test_04)
--------------------------
When I unload Test_04, however - I now get the following problem.
[2.A] SE Menu -> Macro -> List User-Loaded Macros (Good : dialog does NOT list Test_04)
[2.B] SE Menu -> Macro -> Unload Module (Bad : dialog DOES list Test_04)
After the module unload process - I expect that the module should NOT show
up on [2.A,B].
--------------------------
I have attached some screen shots that show - Test_04 loaded - and it
shows up on one dialog [1.B] - but not on dialog [1.A].
Furthermore - when I unload Test_04 - dialog [2.B] always shows Test_04 as
loaded.
Perhaps there is a bug in the testcase (Test_04 attached) - that is
missing some API calls - that need to ensure synchronicity between dialogs
[A] and [ B]?
Thought I would post this - to see if the attached test case code is
flawed (is Test_04 attached flawed).
--------------------------
Final note - It seems like the unload process does not remove Test_04 -
from the SE environment at all. Is this by design?
I can repeat the unload process again and again - via dialog [2.B] - and
get the same validation behavior - that show the Test_04 module is still
loaded - and can function - even AFTER a previous unload process has
completed.
Perhaps I am missing something - in the way the SE Module paradigm should
work? Just in case - the following discussion explains the use case.
--------------------------
My concern deals with massive amounts of grep toolbars (60 to 100) - used
by large software development teams. Different code domains - require the
clean up of toolbars when - the user defined (code domain specific) SE
module is unloaded - and the user metaphorically exits that code domain.
So if I leave a MS XAML based GUI code domain - and enter a MS classic
windows GUI code domain - I no longer have grep toolbars specific to
XAML. The same thing goes for networking, threading, different OS and
different program language variations/permutations.
Note that some workspaces and applications are complex and 'heavy' by
nature. Many code domains (XMAL, threading, networking, advanced data
processing, 3D imaging and dataflow/workflow process automation - are
all rolled up into one heck of powerful application (enterprise level -
science and advanced data processing, etc).
For this caliber of software applications - having to switch workspaces
for the same application is NOT good. There must be a least one workspace
- that contains all the code in the application.
Additional SE workspaces may exist - to minimize the code space for
specific software programmers (newbies or contractors who only work
one aspect of the application - like threading or XMAL).
So ... I thought I should post this - in case this behavior is a real bug
in the SE release candidate.
--------------------------
Is the attached SE code module (Test_04) OK - or is it flawed?
PS. There seems to be some font issue (bold on) - when a posting
has [some_text] in square brackets such as [ B] vs without a space.