I daresay this is good advice generally, but if for example I want to change the name of a variable, I would find it very helpful if I could find each occurrence easily. It’s easy to miss one buried inside a collapsed section, query builder or a condition etc. (OK, I can go into code view, but still…)
I’d still go for a simple and complete row number, as maybe you may tell your collegue “got to ‘then’ at line 123”.
Maybe a toggle row numbers would be suitable?
1 Like
I disagree… I have some huge algorithms which all belong in the same action, and searching would be very useful…
1 Like
Learning how to apply modularity is even more useful.
Bad practice shouldn’t be a trigger for new functionality.
3 Likes
The assumption that a server action file that would benefit from being searchable indicates the developer needs to learn how to apply modularity would be a false assumption. It is perfectly possible that the server action concerned demonstrates excellent understanding and implementation of modularity.
Essentially, this is true, of course (although new functionality can be triggered by bad practice - in an effort to avoid the user of that bad practice). However, I am sure you will agree there is no definable point at which a server action file becomes too long or too convoluted - or indicates bad practice. I expect the vast majority of server action files are just a few lines long. There may be others which are far longer, and for good reason.
We don’t know the length of the sample server action used in this discussion. From what is visible, I think it would benefit from being searchable - and of course much of the detail is not visible. I wonder if you consider this example too long? The full action file could be much longer, and still not be the result of bad practice, IMO (and would of course benefit even more from being searchable).
Of course that is no implied comment on my design skills… 
I’ll submit a request to have the search removed from the rest of Wappler to encourage “good design practices”…
1 Like
A screenshot in another thread yesterday reminded me of the current thread. I think it’s a good example of some of the problems with the current design and (missing) features. The 8 lines on the left are equivalent to the 18 lines in the Wappler version. The Wappler version is unnecessarily complicated and difficult to read.
3 Likes
@TomD Antony is well known for overcomplicating things and pursuing bad practices. Moreover he is also well known for telling off people for pointing that out. Nobody should tell hem how he should do things. Even if it’s the optimal way of doing them.
Don’t get me wrong. He does get them right sometimes so not all his feedback is bad per se. The problem is that with his history you need to dig deeper to find out if the feedback he is giving is the result of an X-Y problem where he wants Y resolved but forgets to mention or to identify that his real problem is X.
3 Likes
I tend to close all the branches if it’s large and that helps it all to look much clearer. But the suggestions for a visual revamp are excellent and will improve things enormously.
if you take out the 6 steps lines you are left with only 12
If you take out the 6 “Steps” lines you are left with only 12 lines. That would be an improvement to start with.
1 Like
Agreed.
The “steps” doesn’t really provide added value.
And the conditional step could be reworded to literally be an if-else(and eventually elseif 
) block. No need to use no-code wording there.
1 Like
Indeed. I had in mind this topic which has many more votes than the current thread, is over 3 years old but sadly hasn’t been implemented. IMO, it’s also much more important than the current topic - from the point of view of basic/essential functionality and usability.
Also, ‘elseif’ relates to this thread in that it would solve some of the visual issues - by simply removing them (see my screenshot above). It also relates to modularity mentioned by @jon earlier in this thread; making it easier to implement modularity would also solve some of the visual issues, again, by removing them.
Thank you for your assessment of my two years posting on this forum @JonL!
Feels like my school report…
“Antony is well intentioned in his work but could try harder to listen to the teachers who clearly always know the best way to do things.”
The biggest thing I have learned in life is that there is no right and wrong. In my view, that is an illusion of the ego that wants to make us feel better than someone else.
The reality is there is just one way or another. Each will have their pros and cons, depending on your background.
Since my background is different to most people here then I totally accept that I will think and do things in a different way… but thankfully never a wrong way! 
3 Likes
Yeah. I also think my way of building skyscrapers is different than an architect’s.
But my way is not wrong. It’s just different. And that’s not bad. It’s ok.
I’ll just ignore every advice given to me about how to build a house because you know. Damn their knowledge and damn their egos.
2 Likes
Thankfully I follow the advice that makes sense to me, rather than blindly following whatever anyone decides they think I should be doing…
And that is cool if it floats your boat.
But other boats will also float while being faster and cost-efficient. Because the one who built it studied for years how to make better boats and makes a living from it.
Moreover he is giving you free advice so you can build better boats and you generally don’t care.
Antony, you can’t be Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak at the same time. If you intend to be Jobs think different and all that shit. But it was Wozniak, the engineer, who built the computers.
2 Likes
This is an interesting conversation now… I’ll start a Coffee Lounge thread on it later!
Please check:
