C/AL code editor

cic · 2004-06-01

Hi!
Who know a more efficient c/al code editor?

medost · 2004-06-01

There is no one...

There are some few programs, which make your work easilier. But an alternative editor does not exit.

RobertMo · 2004-06-01

after a few years you will get used to it. believe me. we all did.

jesam · 2004-06-02

I didn't. Every time I fire up VS.NET, I have the feeling of driving a Ferari, and when I have to work in the C/AL code editor again, I feel like driving a Lada made in 1960. It's my number one reason for really hating Navision.

RobertMo · 2004-06-02

I'm "lucky" that I don't use any other development tools...

DenSter · 2004-06-03

I agree, there's lots of things that could be added to Navision (a debugger that actually works without interruptions for instance), but the mistake that many people here make is to mistake Navision with an actual development tool.

The Navision EDI was designed to enable easy customization of business processes within Navision, mostly data operations. Pretty boring stuff for 'Real' developers, but the oil that greases economies, and it enables all of us to be extremely productive with minimal effort. No database connections to take care of, no problems with security, no extraneous properties that you never use anyway....

I challange you to find an EDI that is as easy to use as Navision. I was able to proficiently and independantly program in Navision and be billable within a week of being hired. No such luck with 'real' programming tools, for which you have to read 1000 page books before you understand just one aspect of it.

nelson · 2004-06-03

I just want to express that I completely agree with DenSter's opinion.
At least someone understands why C/SIDE is the way it is!

jesam · 2004-06-03

I can not understand how you all want to find excuses for the fact that the IDE is complete crap.
There is nothing wrong with admitting that the product you use is far from perfect. And that other products maybe are even more crappier is hardly an excuse.
The IDE is worse than the IDE Turbo Pascal had 15 years ago (and as we all know, in IT a year counts for 5, so the Lada of 1960 is actually too much credit for the IDE).
That the IDE is only aimed at small customisations is another point I don't buy. A lot of companies have the need to customize much much more, it goes as far as adding complete new sections to Navision. And if the IDE was not meant to do these things, why do they sell a license to do these kind of things then ?
If you produce a car that can only drive 60 kmh, you only need brakes adequate for that. If you produce the same car with a bigger engine so that it can drive 120 kmh, but you stick to the same brakes, disaster is iminent. Nobody is goign to buy your excuse that althoug the car can drive 120 kmh, you should only have driven 60 because the brakes were not adequate.
People would call the complete car a faulty product. That's why I call Navision 3.10 (the version we work with) a faulty product (well there are other reasons too).

leugim · 2004-06-03

hi there!

i was reading your replies and ... for how long will you be talking about? of course the IDE is not the best and of coures some other tools gives a lot of functionallity that Navision doesn't but... to develop and/or programming in C/AL this IDE is the only one... you can also try to program in a external text editor, make some txt objects and then try to import to a database but i think all of you know that this way is the worst you can work with

if you know earlier versions of Navision (from 2.00 to attain 3.70) you can find a lot of changes in C/AL editor, such a best debugger, some new functionality and some other...

so, i think C/AL editor is the worst i ever knew but it's the only to develop rightly in Navision. you yourself

regards

RobertMo · 2004-06-03

in fact Navision really didn't want that IDE is used for big development at customer side. That's why each table costs (have you seen this model anywhere else) and also development license is pretty expensive (and you get lousy tool for that money

)

what they wanted is to force customers to use standard functionality and keep it close to original. it is easier to support and to upgrade...

but still product must be easily customizable, otherwise only companies that "exist in theory" would buy it.

And IDE is easiest way to do it. You don't mess with exe files, distribution of dll after changing, additional instalations, etc..

maybe they should not call it IDE, but ICT = Integrated customization tool... but then again from marketing point of view IDE just seems you get much more - a real development environment. (which looks cool for your boss, but not for you)

compare it with swiss army knife. it's not a chainsaw, but if you need, you can bring a tree down...
and open a beer... (oops, you can't do this with IDE either)

nelson · 2004-06-03

DenSter wrote:

I challange you to find an EDI that is as easy to use as Navision. I was able to proficiently and independantly program in Navision and be billable within a week of being hired. No such luck with 'real' programming tools, for which you have to read 1000 page books before you understand just one aspect of it.

So... who will accept this challenge?
And these are absolutely NOT excuses. It's just a no-frills approach to ERP development.

DenSter · 2004-06-07

I don't think I am being understood

. I am not making excuses for Navision, because I don't think there is much wrong with it. I absolutely LOVE the Navision IDE. I can do anything I want, and in 10% of the time it would take me using a 'real' programming tool. You can say all you want, but it is NOT crap. It could have a lot of additional cool features, but what it does, it does a HECK of a lot better than many other tools I have seen.

For companies that buy Navision, the price for additional tables is acceptable, otherwise they'd have bought something else. I have yet to hear a complaint from any of our customers that tables are so expensive, and I have been involved in HUGE Navision developments. I just don't understand why some of you feel the need to complain about the IDE, instead of just accepting what it is intended for, what it can do (i.e. what its limitations are) and work with it.

To give you an example... I worked on a Navision MSCRM integration last year, that included some pretty extensive C/AL programming (including some pretty heavy coding accessing external applications). The entire Navision part took me (just me) about 3 days to complete, and the rest took me and another person about 3 months to do. We learned a lot about the 'real' stuff, but we also learned that you need about 15 times as much knowledge to be able to do that same thing.

So what if you can't impersonate network credentials, or so what if you can't use a visual OCX in Navision (other people can add to this list). I have yet to see anything that you'd want to do with an ERP package that is not possible with Navision. I'm not talking about something highly technical, but a valid business process.

There's just no way around it. Even though there are many things 'missing' from the Navision IDE, it is the most efficient development tool around. If you hate working with Navision so much, I think it is time to stop complaining and find another job.

nelson · 2004-06-07

Cheers DenSter!
Concise and to the point.

RobertMo · 2004-06-07

DenSter (and others), If I haven't mentioned before, I totally agree.

kine · 2004-06-08

Strength is in simplicity... 8)

I Agree...

srini_shetty · 2004-06-08

no Comments ...... just agree !

Gmc · 2004-06-08

Well guys, I do not aggree. I think all system must be rebuilt according to new technology standarts. All stuff was coded to use with native server and is not optimized to work with the SQL server... IDE is NOT GOOD, and it can be better. I don't mean "visual" effects or stuff. I mean language possibilities and debugger (most of all). Why you guys think that the progress should stop just because you can solve your current problems with this primitive IDE?

janpieter · 2004-06-08

Well from a VC++ or VB programmer point of view the editor is bad. But i agree: it doesn't have to be compararable with these 4GL languages.

At least the object oriented thought is in it and it has an easy way of database programming. For an ERP system I think Both of this is quite good. Though there is room for a lot of improvements, with creativity you can still achieve a lot of things.

I neither think the editor is bad or is good. It comes in between.

Colours in the editor would be nice though same as using standard windows controls as it seems that navision form controls don't have handles :evil:

nuno.silva · 2004-11-08

DenSter wrote:

So what if you can't impersonate network credentials, or so what if you can't use a visual OCX in Navision (other people can add to this list). I have yet to see anything that you'd want to do with an ERP package that is not possible with Navision. I'm not talking about something highly technical, but a valid business process.

I saw a lot of stuff made with Dexterity (Great Plains) that you don't do in Navision.

ecarmody · 2004-11-08

Well, in regards to the C/AL editor, which is what the subject is about (not the abilities of C/AL), I use almost exclusively an external text editior; UltraEdit in fact, which even has available a syntax file so it highlights the code for you.

We keep all our objects exported as text and locked into a source safe (SS). All maintenance is done to the checked out SS objects and then imported into Navision.

We also keep a complete readonly copy of all the SS objects (tables, codeunits, forms, reports, dataports) in text files on disk. Nothing beats doing searches against the text files, or preusing/reviewing the code simple by bringing it up in your favorite text editor.

Since the exported code is Pascal structure, its easy to program it in its native format. Also, since the all the code is right there, it removes the idiosyncrasies of the IDE, like having to drill down through the menu/tabs to get to a procedures parameters or locals vars, etc.

That's my two cents.

Cheers,
Eric

jesam · 2004-11-09

Eric,

How do you import your code back into Navision then ? By just loading it as a text file ? Is UltraEdit capable of doing a full Syntax Check ? If you use an undeclared variable for instance , does it detect that ?

Thanks,

Jens

nuno.silva · 2004-11-09

ecarmody wrote:

We keep all our objects exported as text and locked into a source safe (SS). All maintenance is done to the checked out SS objects and then imported into Navision.

Wich tool do you use for source safe?

ecarmody · 2004-11-09

In answer to a few questions.

To import, yes, I just do the Import option from the Object Designer. Syntax errors have to be corrected at that time. If I correct the syntax back in the text editor, then redo the import. If I just go into the OD Designer and correct the syntax (if the import completed) then I would have to re-export back out so my text file is kept in sync. You need to resist the temptation to make little changes to several different objects or you will soon be out of sync to your master text files. Otherwise, you need to round up all you changed objects (using Modified flag on OD) and export them all to update your text files.

Note. UltraEdit has many useful features which help along the way, one being a in the right-click popup menu "copy file/path" which copies the current file/path into the clipboard, so when I switch to Navision OD and do import, I just paste the full file/path into the name field and don't have to type or browse for it.

We use MS Visual Souce Safe.

P.S. I'm not trying to turn this into a "UltraEdit" advertisement. I have no association to that product and I don't condone it over another; its just what I use.

Cheers,
Eric

Jelias1 · 2004-11-10

I use CodeWright, which is what Navision itself recommended when 2.60 came out.

In fact, on the 2.5 and 2.6 developer CDs there was a special Codewright.ini file written by Navision that gave perfect syntax highlighting, etc., etc.

Unfortunately, I can't find it and lost the ini file

. If any one can find it on an old CD I would love to have it again.

Even without the special ini file, I still use Codewright for any serious coding, by telling codewright to use Pascal editing/syntax highlighting, etc. features when opening a txt file. I export out from Navision as a text file, make changes, import back into Navision and recompile. I correct any compiler errors in Navision, and test.

I there's a problem and it's only a couple of lines, I do it in Navision. When I'm done and ready to do more REAL programming, I reexport out to text and switch to Codewright (which is still open). It instantly detects that an outside program has changed the file and asks to reload, which I do. Then I continue.

Watch out for curly braces when you code this way. There are a lot more curly braces in the text file that what you see in the Navision 'IDE' (sic). If you make a mistake with the curly braces, Navision will not compile and will not let you in the code, although it will tell you the line number where the error occurred. However, you have to make the correction in Codewright and reimport before you can compile and get back into it in Navision.

By the way, Navison has absolutely the worse IDE I have ever used, and I've used most of them. Those who defend the IDE ... well, I used to know a guy back in the 80s who wrote BASIC programs using EDLIN. In the mid 90's I knew Assembler and C++ programmers who used DOS Edit.

When I'm on a customer computer who does not have Codewright, I often use Notepad to make extensive changes. That should tell you something.

Christian_Buehl · 2004-11-10

IMHO most of you are right. There are many things missing in the IDE. But as mentioned the IDE has a couple of godd benefits.
I believe it's better to talk about what exactly is missing and putting this information (through NSC's or however to MS to improve.
Some simple things I'm missing are:
- Syntax highlighting
- Automatic indention
- Code completion (while typing, with shown argument lists)
- Something like RCS/CVS/Subversion to enable teamworking
- A search where a field or function is called from
- A more efficient debugger where you can set breakpoints when variables or datafields have been modified.

I think, just adding these few features, I will be really satisfied. I believe that there is nothing really unthinkable.

janpieter · 2004-11-10

uch sure that would be ideal but i dont think MBS will bother upgrading the IDE.

Wait a few years and you will probably get the .NET C# IDE. Until then i don't beleive they will make an effort to upgrade the Navision IDE.

But i hope they do ... :roll:

I still prefer the navision IDE because when i press F11 i inmediatly know my syntax is good or bad. (im the kind of programmer that makes a lot of spelling errors .. :? )

Anonymous · 2004-11-15

jesam wrote:

I didn't. Every time I fire up VS.NET, I have the feeling of driving a Ferari, and when I have to work in the C/AL code editor again, I feel like driving a Lada made in 1960. It's my number one reason for really hating Navision.

You don't like LADA?

jesam · 2004-11-16

My parents once had a Lada, durgin the three years we had it, the car costed about as much to repair as it costed new to buy. Never again.

But this is off course entirely besides the point. I've had the joy of working in VB.NET for the last few months, but from thursday on it'll be Navision again. Welcome frustration and depression.

asisbiswas · 2004-11-18

Now I understood why customers are not happy with NSCs when people can think they understood entire Navision and computer and software technology within a week and start billing the customers.

DenSter wrote:

I don't think I am being understood . I am not making excuses for Navision, because I don't think there is much wrong with it. I absolutely LOVE the Navision IDE. I can do anything I want, and in 10% of the time it would take me using a 'real' programming tool. You can say all you want, but it is NOT crap. It could have a lot of additional cool features, but what it does, it does a HECK of a lot better than many other tools I have seen.

For companies that buy Navision, the price for additional tables is acceptable, otherwise they'd have bought something else. I have yet to hear a complaint from any of our customers that tables are so expensive, and I have been involved in HUGE Navision developments. I just don't understand why some of you feel the need to complain about the IDE, instead of just accepting what it is intended for, what it can do (i.e. what its limitations are) and work with it.

To give you an example... I worked on a Navision MSCRM integration last year, that included some pretty extensive C/AL programming (including some pretty heavy coding accessing external applications). The entire Navision part took me (just me) about 3 days to complete, and the rest took me and another person about 3 months to do. We learned a lot about the 'real' stuff, but we also learned that you need about 15 times as much knowledge to be able to do that same thing.

So what if you can't impersonate network credentials, or so what if you can't use a visual OCX in Navision (other people can add to this list). I have yet to see anything that you'd want to do with an ERP package that is not possible with Navision. I'm not talking about something highly technical, but a valid business process.

There's just no way around it. Even though there are many things 'missing' from the Navision IDE, it is the most efficient development tool around. If you hate working with Navision so much, I think it is time to stop complaining and find another job.

nuno.silva · 2004-11-19

DenSter wrote:

... I have yet to see anything that you'd want to do with an ERP package that is not possible with Navision.

Try Dexterity from Great Plains Software.

DenSter · 2004-11-19

asisbiswas wrote:

Now I understood why customers are not happy with NSCs when people can think they understood entire Navision and computer and software technology within a week and start billing the customers.

I never said I understood entire Navision, I never said I understood entire computer, I never said I understood entire software technology. What I said is that I was billable within a week, using the Navision IDE, which would not have been as easy with an IDE like Visual Studio.

By the way, that means that I was solving actual customer problems, and since that is what we do, we charged the customer for my services. When I first started, my hourly rate was a lot lower than it is now, and the customer was informed of my level of experience, so we did not mislead anybody, if that is what you are implying.

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Categories

C/AL code editor

Comments