Dmitry Jemerov - 07 Feb 08 18:43 We would much rather spend development effort on features that would help you avoid getting into a state when your project does not compile. (On a related note, the professional edition of TeamCity 3.0 is available for free...)

Erik T - 09 Feb 08 01:38 We are using Team City Also, forgive the example, it was just one time we ran into that scenario. Aside from that there are many times I have wished for this behavior. Thanks!

Erik T - 06 Jun 08 19:32 Another scenario is doing a refactor -> method signature change, and changing the return type. This broke many classes which would not compile, and I could not fix one test and assert my new code was correct, without having to copy this fix to every usage of the method, in test and production code. I would prefer the ability to incrementally work through scenarios (that this type of compiling allows). I will say, I've been a long time user of Intellij, and tried to introduce it to many shops I've been in over the years. Over the last few years this is one of the most common complaints I get from people about working with IntelliJ. Everyone has a slightly different approach to development, and while there are obvious best practices I feel that the tool should support the broadest range of approaches and not try to dictate a certain approach. Not every person is capable of doing a text-book test-first approach, and even those that are, not every scenario lends itself to that scenario either. Just my 2 cents, take it for what it's worth.