ampfixer
I know nothing about software development, but I do know a couple things about QA and statistics. It would be hard to track all the interdependencies in Sonar IF there was only one way to do each task and a finite number of tasks. With something as complicated as Sonar the combinations and permutations that the system deals with has to be in the billions.
 
The term workflow, and the fact that everyone seems to have a unique workflow basically means there's a whole bunch of different ways to arrive at the destination. To have that freedom, I accept the fact that my unique way of doing things may trigger a problem that was unforeseen. My imagination is putting uncertainty into the system. I can live with that.
 
Good on you Bakers (wizards), keep on working the system.

+1

ampfixer
The term workflow, and the fact that everyone seems to have a unique workflow basically means there's a whole bunch of different ways to arrive at the destination. To have that freedom, I accept the fact that my unique way of doing things may trigger a problem that was unforeseen. My imagination is putting uncertainty into the system. I can live with that.

That is an excellent point that I have never seen articulated so clearly.

I've found that most of the bugs I personally encounter are usually due to either me or my computer. I havent encountered any real bugs during my use in the new updates. However, i understand we all work differently and do different types of music that may use different chains of processes that can bring out the bugs. The bakers i believe, are doing their best and I've never had a real problem so far. It's a great DAW and its still young in its release. Give it some time to perfect itself. There's no possible way they can test every single situation.

There would be far less bugs if there was only one or two ways of accomplishing the same task. The fact that Sonar seems to have about a half dozen ways to get a particular thing done lends itself to those nasty interdependency(s), but also lends itself to ease of use over many versions.......IMHO of course.

ampfixer
I know nothing about software development, but I do know a couple things about QA and statistics. It would be hard to track all the interdependencies in Sonar IF there was only one way to do each task and a finite number of tasks. With something as complicated as Sonar the combinations and permutations that the system deals with has to be in the billions.
 
The term workflow, and the fact that everyone seems to have a unique workflow basically means there's a whole bunch of different ways to arrive at the destination. To have that freedom, I accept the fact that my unique way of doing things may trigger a problem that was unforeseen. My imagination is putting uncertainty into the system. I can live with that.
 
Good on you Bakers (wizards), keep on working the system.

I agree. +1

In the 80/90ss it was popular to quote the TQM model for software development. You can only pick two of the three. Time, Quality or Money(cost of effort). The third will suffer. Suffer is a relative term, but suffer it will.
 
Pick Time (you want it quick) and Money (do it as cheaply as possible or you have/impose resource limitations). What would you expect the Quality to be?
 
Pick Quality and Money. You may NEVER get it.
 
etc. et. al.
 
Maybe I'm old fashioned (I've been an applications programmer since 1979 and still work full time at it) but I think the principals still apply even if we want to delude ourselves with the new terminologies (Agile, Scrum etc.).
 
Noel said it best. None of knows what goes inside The Bakers' oven.
 
Speculation gains nothing.

There was also an article published in the 80/90s about QA and touch points. The article concluded that a simple system of moderate touch points tested at the speed of light would take something like 140,000 years (IIRC, it may have been only 14,000) to test all permutations. 
 
I'm pretty SONAR would take at least double that.