Derek Shpuniarsky

I don't think the criteria I am posting is different from the general consensus of the previous replies, but it might help others as it helps me to decisively determine where to draw the line... I always filter comments based on whether they answer 'what am I doing' or 'how am I doing' something and leave out the 'hows'. The level of detail is based on what questions someone else familiar with the purpose of the SW would ask (the peer review scenario) or similarly, what I will forget about a couple months after finishing it (the SW update scenario). Exceptions would be comments answering the 'why' questions that require knowledge contained in a manual the programmer may be unfamiliar with. AQ gave one example of this earlier. Another example would be including documentation about the bits in a product's register when manipulating them.

My company has been using it for 2 years. I have been developing manufacturing tests that interface with it for the last year. I consider it indispensable and other groups in the company access it on a regular basis as well. Up front, it is not the cheapest solution but in the big picture I'm sure it would cost MUCH more to get the same functionality from an in house solution (similar to TestStand vs. a home brew test executive). It is very easy to use and their customer support is excellent. If you are interested I suggest giving them a call (you will get someone who can answer all of your technical questions). If you want some specific information from a user's perspective I can do that.