"Undo" functionality

Does anyone know if there are any plans to implement undo functionality when amending sections etc? It would be great to be able to quickly undo a section change instead of having to save, close, reopen to lock changes in.

**Moderation Team has archived post**

This post has been archived for educational purposes. Contents and links will no longer be updated. If you have the same/similar question, please write a new post.


Keep up to date on this post and subscribe to comments

October 9, 2009 - 4:43pm

(Assume you are referring to updating rules as a developer, not updating work objects as an application user).

Not without saving. Until you save a rule, your typed inputs are present only on your own browser. Saving causes the inputs to be sent to the Process Commander server, validated, and saved to the database. (You just need to Save, not Save+Close+Open).
A form of "undo" is provided if you enable RuleSet checkout for a RuleSet (and for your own Operator ID). For one thing, you can mess up your checked out version without hurting anyone else's work, and always delete it and fall back to the original, non-checked-out copy.

More significantly, each time you check in a rule, the entire previous rule is saved in rule history. Using the RESTORE toolbar operation, you can fall back to that previous state.


October 11, 2011 - 11:01am

While certainly the functionality *can* be replaced by the built-in source control, this is like removing the undo function from notepad and claiming SVN is all you need.

This is one of my biggest gripes with PRPC's development capacity. Developers use the undo, ctrl-z, hotkey often, and the lack of this functionality slows development. Please consider doing a case study of developers in other IDEs and you'll see how often ctrl-z is used.

Also, need some real DIFFing functionality and syntax highlighting in java steps.

Bracket-syntax is notably missing from activities. Activities force a top-down sequential approach, which means the only way to replicate brackets and repetition is the use of GOTOs (which is terrible programming and Pega even says so in their Best Practices, yet still implements the functionality), and branched activities, which add unnecessary overhead both in processing and development.

There's no Copy and Pasting functionality in any rules outside of built-in text areas. I can't copy a cell in a section and paste it elsewhere. I can't copy a bunch of steps and paste it elsewhere. Developers spend a LOT of time copy and pasting and this lack of functionality only adds to the tedium of developing in PRPC.

There's an obviously missing watch list of variables that could be used during activity development. For example, unless I had read the Help gnosis on Param.pyForEachCount, I would never have known that property was available in a value list iteration. If I hadn't looked at some Pega activities, I would never know that oLog is the standard variable available for logging in a Java step.

Developers aren't psychic, and we can't work simply off of a spattering of articles. PRPC has to provide some basic functionality available in standard IDEs or its applications will always fail to live up to their potential.

October 11, 2011 - 11:09am

Hi. I can assure you that we recognize the value of supporting Undo. There are some technical hurdles to clear but it's something we hope to add in a future release.


October 12, 2011 - 12:05pm

I second DCHIANGTWO views on watch list variables. There are many params & properties which are poorly documented, it is difficult particularly for beginners to understand its usage.

Developers resort to roundabout means to get something done when it could have been implemented in a simpler and quicker way had the usage of such variables been readily known.