Jump to content











Photo
- - - - -

Galapo & Lancelot Questions and Answers


  • Please log in to reply
62 replies to this topic

#51 Galapo

Galapo

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 3841 posts
  •  
    Australia

Posted 14 March 2010 - 06:47 AM

Hi Lancelot,

Yep, I completely agree and you have given more of the picture.

All I was trying to do was to simplify the complex picture for Nuno so that the basic picture might be grasped by Nuno so that we might hopefully be able to move on from the impasse.

Regards,
Galapo.

#52 Nuno Brito

Nuno Brito

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 10545 posts
  • Location:boot.wim
  • Interests:I'm just a quiet simple person with a very quiet simple life living one day at a time..
  •  
    European Union

Posted 14 March 2010 - 06:56 AM

So, where is the new topic to properly discuss this?

Why isn't a google doc spreadsheet available where we can write and weight the pros and cons of using commas?

The picture for me is simple from day one. Create a new topic, create a poll, expose your
arguments and gather supporters.

For me, it's not ok to keep insisting on off-topic ramblings.

Get your hands to work.

#53 Lancelot

Lancelot

    Frequent Member

  • .script developer
  • 5013 posts
  • Location:Turkiye/Izmir
  • Interests:*Mechanical stuff and Physics,
    *LiveXP, BartPE, SherpyaXPE,
    *Basketball and Looong Walking,
    *Buying outwear for my girlf (Reason: Girls are stupid about buying bad stuff to make themselves uglier :))
    *Girls (Lyric: Girl,...., You will be a womann, Soon)
    *Answering questions for "Meaning of life",
    *Helping people,

    Kung with LiveXP, Fu with Peter :)
  •  
    Turkey

Posted 14 March 2010 - 07:20 AM

So, where is the new topic to properly discuss this?

Why isn't a google doc spreadsheet available where we can write and weight the pros and cons of using commas?

The picture for me is simple from day one. Create a new topic, create a poll, expose your
arguments and gather supporters.

For me, it's not ok to keep insisting on off-topic ramblings.

Get your hands to work.


It was discussed many times (ahh my google-fu abilities not good, I am pretty sure jaclaz could throw 10 links to relevant topics quickly ) and all these times everybody except one wrote it is more feasable and easly to write between quotes. Don't you remember how many times it was written, even don't you remember wonko's comments. (or Alzhemier is your friend too)

Before you scatter posts all around, comments were here
http://www.boot-land...?...t&pid=93787

now you scattered all around.....

Besides topic is
http://www.boot-land...?...t&pid=93787
about tolerating quotes and unpredictable results of not tolerating, which never honestly answered by you.

Thanks again for your above post which does not contain any answer to our 1 question so far.

I leave opening new topic to Galapo since he has
1) much better english
2) softer tone
3) more hope than me.

Good luck boss. (Galapo)

#54 Nuno Brito

Nuno Brito

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 10545 posts
  • Location:boot.wim
  • Interests:I'm just a quiet simple person with a very quiet simple life living one day at a time..
  •  
    European Union

Posted 14 March 2010 - 07:24 AM

Before you scatter posts all around, comments were here

Sure. I'm the one always jumping into other topics complaining about commas.. :cheers:

Either you or Galapo should create a new topic with a proper title and properly explaining your opinion.

The topic at:
http://www.boot-land...showtopic=10665

Is still resembling more like a rant than a proper exposition of the facts and arguments that explain with commas should or shouldn't be support by wb syntax.

If we want a proper discussion to occur, let's lay out the facts and reasons. Possibly even a poll to see what other folks think.

#55 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 14919 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 14 March 2010 - 08:47 AM

Possibly even a poll to see what other folks think.


Why?

If you are interested in popularity of choices rather than quality of final product, start it yourself.

There is no need for any poll, I can draw the statistics right here and now, out of 34,000, 33,050 members are either leechers or too shy to even post.
Of the 50 remaining:
  • 2 find they are right
  • 2 find the first two are completely and utterly wrong AND are feeling a deep delusion
  • 3 find that the first two are completely and utterly wrong and don't post anymore, nor produce anything useful because of this
  • 1 find that the first two are completely and utterly wrong, but actually doesn't care, as winbuilder and .scripts are none of his business
  • 7 find that the first two are completely and utterly wrong, and don't contribute anything since they have better things to do
  • 30 find that the first two are completely and utterly wrong, but have more important things to do and will simply go on as before
  • 5 find that the first two are partially right, but don't care

Please note how the list is ordered intentionally by the amount of time and contributions/help people contributed to the Board and Winbuilder, one way or the other.

:cheers:

Wonko

#56 Nuno Brito

Nuno Brito

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 10545 posts
  • Location:boot.wim
  • Interests:I'm just a quiet simple person with a very quiet simple life living one day at a time..
  •  
    European Union

Posted 14 March 2010 - 09:04 AM

If you are interested in popularity of choices rather than quality of final product, start it yourself.

Done!

I'm very interested in both the quality of the final product and the popularity of choices.

http://www.boot-land...showtopic=10740

:cheers:

#57 Galapo

Galapo

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 3841 posts
  •  
    Australia

Posted 14 March 2010 - 10:55 AM

Hmmm, Nuno I see you continue to direct attention from the issues I tried to bring into focus:

1. An agreement had been reached between myself, Lancelot, and Peter over the use of quotes (and other who were also following the development topic, it's all in the topic at the development subforum which Lancelot has repeatedly referenced). The agreement was that WB would move to implementing this as the basic form of syntax. This would mean that the need for ###$c etc would be very much minimised, making script development easier and more fun for everyone. Since then, Peter has gone back on his agreement, evident in various bug reports lately, his editing of the syntax page, and admitted by him here: http://www.boot-land...?...ost&p=94253. Essentially what he is saying is that he's going to force everyone to adopt his no-quote rule, or else they will be left with unsupported WB functions and new functions unavailable if your script uses quote syntax. So essentially this is about the future of default WB syntax: a quote or no quote syntax for WB scripting. It's not about CAPI. It's not about a test project to maintain standards. It's about what is accepted WB syntax.

2. Secondly this is about the related issue of sensibility in WB scripting. We feel that since WB script syntax has yet to be settled, now is the time to make a stand to restore some common sense. Quotes aid this sensibility. And quotes help to minimise the need for escapes, or in WB syntax case, the need for escapes of escapes of escapes (###$c etc.). When you're requiring double and triple escape sequences all the time, it tells that there is something fundamentally wrong. We need some common sense restored is all. That's what this is also about.


Issue is fundamentally about the use of quotes. Use of commas etc. is a consequence of this prior issue. Issue of commas is a side-issue and it seems to me you still want to speak on side issues rather than focus on the real matter at hand.

Well, I just give up!

Regards,
Galapo.

#58 Lancelot

Lancelot

    Frequent Member

  • .script developer
  • 5013 posts
  • Location:Turkiye/Izmir
  • Interests:*Mechanical stuff and Physics,
    *LiveXP, BartPE, SherpyaXPE,
    *Basketball and Looong Walking,
    *Buying outwear for my girlf (Reason: Girls are stupid about buying bad stuff to make themselves uglier :))
    *Girls (Lyric: Girl,...., You will be a womann, Soon)
    *Answering questions for "Meaning of life",
    *Helping people,

    Kung with LiveXP, Fu with Peter :)
  •  
    Turkey

Posted 15 March 2010 - 03:47 AM

I do not want to reply again on vote topic :cheers:.

My answer is: "It depends"
http://www.jrothman..../ItDepends.html

If you read carefully the paper that I referred on the above link,
you will certainly find a lot of similarities to the case that we are
now debating here.

After fully reading:

From first day these topics created, question asked you what is your decision for quotes usage.
What is the Fundemantal syntax rule (cryptic or none-cryptic // quote or escape).
You decide to open a vote topic, and All replies to vote topic so far votes to none-cryptic

Yep article is nice and there are lines that made me smile.
But what we ask is fundemantal, not cosmetics or additional features or improvment.

Fundemantals. Your answer is "It depends"
Remiding, it was written before both 1) if (echo) and 2) set (macro-per) fixed (or lets say back to old regime) on alpha.

Your unclear-answer naturally cause the question:
Depends on what?
Without getting this answer, it is impossible for any tester to make/prepare neither exploratory testing nor automated testing.
It is a decision waiting to be made by you. Currently I do not know what will more not working as before since the 2 things written to changed back to old good (none-cryptic) regime in alpha.

Still syntax rule 3 remains the same,
http://winbuilder.ne...tax.html#syntax

with warnings we do not know referring (depending) to what.

First I'll write the test cases and document the correct syntax
that is expected. Only then I'll have the conditions to tell which
decision is more appropriate than another for a given way of
doing things.

I dislike cryptic syntax as much as the next developer but I will base
my opinion in facts and try to understand where and why this is needed.

With some luck I might find some free time to start tonight, will keep you
guys updated and then we'll have something to actually talk about with
facts and working code.


Waiting your new topic. Please do not forget to update us.
We do not have death line, customers ;) are patient and only wants a good working easly used winbuilder with open gate questions and answers with the soul of free world and working together.

Good luck on working wb codes.

;)

#59 Galapo

Galapo

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 3841 posts
  •  
    Australia

Posted 15 March 2010 - 04:57 AM

Finally after hundreds of posts, Nuno actually answers the question with a non-committal non-answer "it depends": http://www.boot-land...?...ost&p=94660.

I was actually hoping for one of three possibilities -- yes, no, or wait.

Particuarly, why is it that scripting syntax is inconsistent due to the agreement on scripting syntax having been silently rejected by WB development? And is it going to remain this way? Or can we look forward to the agreement being implemented into WB?


As it is, the "it depends" answer sums up the concern I raised a number of days ago with the topic title "WB scripting unpredictability": http://www.boot-land...showtopic=10665. "It depends" equates to unpredicatability, or essentially as I put it in the topic "WB Russian roulette script writing". So after a number of days we're back to where all this began. No substantial progress has been made apart from a lot of mud having been thrown about.

I'd hoped that there might possibily have been some progress in discussions, which is why I kept pressing the point. Maybe I shouldn't have been so hopeful that things might have turned out better, esp. when the result of day after day of posting on the subject results in an answer simply of "it depends". Makes my heart sink and wish I'd spent my time differently. Today is Monday for me and I've already stepped over the deadline I'd given myself in posting on this of Sunday night. I've got a really busy few weeks, or even a couple of months, ahead at work, so I'll be unable to continue with this discussion. Galapo bows out.

Regards,
Galapo.

#60 Nuno Brito

Nuno Brito

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 10545 posts
  • Location:boot.wim
  • Interests:I'm just a quiet simple person with a very quiet simple life living one day at a time..
  •  
    European Union

Posted 17 March 2010 - 06:04 AM

"It depends" is actually one of the most frustrating and important answers that you get when engineering some software application with relative complexity like winbuilder.

Because whichever question that you make "use cryptic syntax or not use cryptic syntax", "use strict something or weak something" will always force you to make tradeoffs.

You will need to make decisions and it's impossible to make all the right choices or even make all the good choices that won't impact some of the other characteristics that you also like.

--------------------------

Our best hope for making the right decisions is to adopt a professional attitude.

Written communication is a problem, that is the reason why I propose a test project. So that other developers can also look and try for themselves and then propose the desired new syntax or use other paths to get things done if available in a relatively simpler manner.

During these discussions, try to be concise. Expose your arguments in a clean and easy to follow manner. When a discussion gets too personal, people take refuge on the extreme sides of diverging opinions instead of actually looking at the problem.

We are changing wb development one step at a time, let's work.

#61 Lancelot

Lancelot

    Frequent Member

  • .script developer
  • 5013 posts
  • Location:Turkiye/Izmir
  • Interests:*Mechanical stuff and Physics,
    *LiveXP, BartPE, SherpyaXPE,
    *Basketball and Looong Walking,
    *Buying outwear for my girlf (Reason: Girls are stupid about buying bad stuff to make themselves uglier :))
    *Girls (Lyric: Girl,...., You will be a womann, Soon)
    *Answering questions for "Meaning of life",
    *Helping people,

    Kung with LiveXP, Fu with Peter :)
  •  
    Turkey

Posted 17 March 2010 - 06:09 AM

@ Nuno

Your post seems fine, but it does not again represent things we wrote so far. But i will not write again.....

As i wrote before, you approve cryptic syntax rule, nothing to write left.

I want to reply what I request before.

All I want is I do not want to reply FALSE accusations and/or post games anymore from neither you nor psc. I hope clear.


I hope for you it is "professional" to make such a request and "profesionally" understandable by you.

#62 Galapo

Galapo

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 3841 posts
  •  
    Australia

Posted 17 March 2010 - 06:24 AM

We are changing wb development one step at a time, let's work.

Hi Nuno,

Well it all depends what you're changing. Peter has already confirmed that his plan is to keep removing use of quotes from accepted syntax. You're already on record for saying that WB will move to implementing more cryptic syntax in line with Peter's aim to remove quotes.

That's the path WB development has laid out before us. For us, there's no work to be done on this because we don't want to work or develop along such a path.

We're happy for any developers to step forward and keep LiveXP up-to-date following this path of quote removal and increase in cryptic syntax. But we ourselves do not want to maintain the project in this manner, so we need other developers to do so if LiveXP is to follow WB into the future WB development currently anticipates.

Regards,
Galapo.

#63 Nuno Brito

Nuno Brito

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 10545 posts
  • Location:boot.wim
  • Interests:I'm just a quiet simple person with a very quiet simple life living one day at a time..
  •  
    European Union

Posted 17 March 2010 - 07:56 AM

You're already on record for saying that WB will move to implementing more cryptic syntax in line with Peter's aim to remove quotes.

:thumbup:

Did you guys even read carefully what I've written? :thumbup:

I basically explained why the syntax that Galapo proposed would force the use of magic chars as the only way of working without errors when an unknown number of "" get mixed with an unknown number of ,,,

---------------------------------------

Galapo & Lancelot's apparent mindset: It works well for me, who cares about the cases where it doesn't work. Just give me the SET to do whatever I want.

---------

What I proposed was an easy way to move away from all these troubles without using SET or magic chars but you don't even seem to listen.

Besides that it doesn't require any new wb commands, it will work perfectly with older wb versions and you still insist on a SET usage that will only work well with magic chars or become a source of bugs in scripting for people that use your project.

---------

That's the only thing that you have on record. Next time read it carefully.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users