Jump to content











Photo
- - - - -

WinBuilder Script Editor Suggestions


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 CMS

CMS

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 12 posts
  • Location:Florida
  •  
    United States

Posted 25 May 2010 - 03:23 PM

Please be civil, I am new. While the current script editor is relatively easy to use, I have thought of a few things that would be nice to have available.

1. a PRINT button would be nice (I like to do brainstorming with paper copies).

2. a TRACE button. When a line that references a different script is highlighted, clicking the TRACE button opens the other script, for review.

3. an OPTIONS button. When clicked, allows the user to modify some basic editor choices, such as highlight colors.

4. a PROJECT button. When clicked, opens all scripts that are being included in the current build, in cascading windows.

5. a DEFINE button. When an item is highlighted, clicking the DEFINE button opens a "tool tip" type window, that explains. For example, a variable will show the current set value, highlighting the numbers after a text string will display what each number adjusts (height, width...etc.).

6. a WALK button. When pressed, will perform the instruction on the line the cursor is on, and move to the next line. Additionally, displays the result of that line's action.

Thanks for listening. I understand that the editor is designed for simplicity, but I firmly believe that the above additions would improve everyone's coding experience. I am certain that I thought of other things, but the above are the ones I remember at this time. I really need to start writing notes to myself.

#2 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12707 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 25 May 2010 - 06:37 PM

#6 is a dream of mine I have since a long time! :thumbsup:

Please allow me to 'disqualify' the other #1 to #5 because they would -as you also see- decrease the simplicity of WB.

Inspite, I encourage you, to repeat and try to convince me and the other developers, if you are sure that it is necessary!

Peter :cheers:

#3 CMS

CMS

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 12 posts
  • Location:Florida
  •  
    United States

Posted 25 May 2010 - 07:29 PM

You state that #1 - #5 would make the editor too complicated. I disagree. Consider this, the people that download WinBuilder fall into only two categories: 1. those that are curious, but expect it to be a one-click process, they never get through a complete build, so they quit trying AND 2. those that actually possess enough programming skills to properly complete a build.

Considering that the first group is not the target audience, adding additional controls to the editor would not make the editor less easy to use. On the contrary, it would make the editor much easier to use, for that second group, your real target group.

Sure there are some serious programmers here, and some totally computer illiterates too. However, for those people that have that overwhelming need to keep at it, until they succeed, including the above mentioned tools would encourage more script development, not inhibit it.

Also consider this: What is the "real" purpose of this site? If you answered "To develop the scripts necessary for bootable projects", you are wrong! The "real" purpose of this site is show off, teach others, develop a sense of global community, develop friendships (no matter how strained) and to just plain have fun. Every project found here is amazing, but I doubt that even one of them was created as a career opus.

Lastly, considering the "real" purpose of the site and program, why should enhancing the editor be any less FUN than writing the scripts? I beg you to reconsider.

#4 MedEvil

MedEvil

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 7771 posts

Posted 25 May 2010 - 08:25 PM

1. Would be easy to do.
2. Only useful for system script developers, if that.
3. Pointless gimmick, imo.
4. Complete nonsense to open hundreds of scripts! Appearantly you have no clue how many scripts make up a project. (nativeEx_barebone=124, LiveXP=311)
5. I guess you're mistaken a little script engine with a full-fledged IDE.
6. If you want a debugger for scripts, just write a message after each line which outputs, what you're interested in.

Point 1. serves a purpose for some and is easy to do. The rest has little to no use and would be more work to implement than the script engine itself.


:thumbsup:

#5 CMS

CMS

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 12 posts
  • Location:Florida
  •  
    United States

Posted 25 May 2010 - 09:27 PM

1. Would be easy to do.
2. Only useful for system script developers, if that.
3. Pointless gimmick, imo.
4. Complete nonsense to open hundreds of scripts! Appearantly you have no clue how many scripts make up a project. (nativeEx_barebone=124, LiveXP=311)
5. I guess you're mistaken a little script engine with a full-fledged IDE.
6. If you want a debugger for scripts, just write a message after each line which outputs, what you're interested in.

Point 1. serves a purpose for some and is easy to do. The rest has little to no use and would be more work to implement than the script engine itself.


:thumbsup:


=================================================================

Thanks for the feedback. I have looked at SlickEdit and PrimalEdit, but found that your "little script engine" was more comfortable to use. I am not trying to upset anyone, just attempting to contribute something.

1. PRINT was suggested because I like to have hard copies to review.

2. TRACE was suggested because it is somewhat difficult to debug when you have to keep jumping from script to script, to follow the flow.

3. OPTIONS is mostly about the color-coding. I like to turn things on and off, by changing their highlight color. Really makes it easier to focus on some particular aspect of the script.

4. PROJECT was suggested because it is nice to have multiple scripts open and available. The number of scripts loaded at one time is easily limited by unchecking them in the build tree. You are quite correct in that I was unaware of the large number of scripts in some of the projects. Sorry about this one. I will just continue with the "save and open new editor" button.

5. DEFINE was suggested because unless you are the author of the script, it is sometimes dificult to back-trace. Being that you use this editor routinely, everything is obvious to you, but to others, having a quick explanation just one click away would be wonderful.

6. WALK was suggested because debugging is so much easier if you can step thru a troublsome process, it is not intended to be used to step through every line of a large project. Besides, Peter likes this one.

#6 Galapo

Galapo

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 3841 posts
  •  
    Australia

Posted 25 May 2010 - 09:54 PM

I add my vote for the implementation of #1, #2, and #6. #2 and #6 would be especially helpful at times.

Regards,
Galapo.

#7 MedEvil

MedEvil

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 7771 posts

Posted 25 May 2010 - 10:48 PM

1. PRINT was suggested because I like to have hard copies to review.

As said, this one makes sense for some and is easy enough to implement.

2. TRACE was suggested because it is somewhat difficult to debug when you have to keep jumping from script to script, to follow the flow.

I'm doing this now for a couple of years as a project maintainer and have not once needed it.

5. DEFINE was suggested because unless you are the author of the script, it is sometimes dificult to back-trace. Being that you use this editor routinely, everything is obvious to you, but to others, having a quick explanation just one click away would be wonderful.

Sorry, but this feature does nothing to help back-trace anything and it's just way too much work for the limited target group, imo.
Besides, i, like some others, don't use the internal editor to write scripts. It is a tool for beginners with it's wizzard. If you do more of this, you won't need that and will want macros instead.

6. WALK was suggested because debugging is so much easier if you can step thru a troublsome process, it is not intended to be used to step through every line of a large project. Besides, Peter likes this one.

Most, if not all, developer turn 'stop on error' off to have a project run it's course, instead of ending prematurely.
But if Peter likes it, you have a good chance to see it one day.


:thumbsup:

#8 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 15026 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 26 May 2010 - 07:10 AM

I'm doing this now for a couple of years as a project maintainer and have not once needed it.

JFYI, American civilizations like Aztecs and Mayas prospered for hundreds of years without ANY need whatsoever for the wheel, which doesn't mean that it isn't a nice little round thing to have. :thumbsup:

I threw in some time ago a parser for Winbuilder syntax for Scite:
http://www.boot-land...?...c=7330&st=1
http://www.boot-land...?...=7330&st=12
that I would find nice, but of course until we don't have a Syntax, it would be mostly useless.


:cheers:
Wonko

#9 MedEvil

MedEvil

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 7771 posts

Posted 26 May 2010 - 10:09 AM

JFYI, American civilizations like Aztecs and Mayas prospered for hundreds of years without ANY need whatsoever for the wheel, which doesn't mean that it isn't a nice little round thing to have. ;)

Ok, so how often did you sit in front of WB-Editor and said: "Damn, if it only had a trace button."? :thumbsup:


:cheers:

#10 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12707 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 26 May 2010 - 10:15 AM

Ok, so how often did you sit in front of WB-Editor and said: "Damn, if it only had a trace button."? :thumbsup:


;)

:cheers:

Peter

#11 gutnik

gutnik

    Member

  • Advanced user
  • 46 posts

Posted 26 May 2010 - 10:29 AM

:thumbsup:
Peter

Unfortunately, my questios are stupid sometimes. L.A.G.

**********
Service Post
psc moved the line which was added to a quote.

I think that the user did not want to change the quoted text.

**********


#12 Master of Disaster

Master of Disaster

    Member

  • Members
  • 62 posts
  •  
    Monaco

Posted 27 May 2010 - 03:43 AM

personally i completely agree with CMS about the points he mentioned from 1 to 6 despite some find that it will complicate winbuilder.

#13 CMS

CMS

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 12 posts
  • Location:Florida
  •  
    United States

Posted 27 May 2010 - 12:15 PM

Me again....still thinking.

How about,

7. SEARCH

8. REPLACE

both with standard functionality.

#14 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12707 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 27 May 2010 - 12:39 PM

If you have the script source code editor open:

There is a binocular buttom for "search". Right of it there are two circled arrows for "next" and "previous" and then a symbol for "replace".

What different do you want to suggest?

Peter

#15 MedEvil

MedEvil

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 7771 posts

Posted 27 May 2010 - 01:15 PM

How about search forward (Weitersuchen) with F3 key? :cheers:

:thumbsup:

#16 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12707 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 27 May 2010 - 01:37 PM

How about search forward (Weitersuchen) with F3 key? :cheers:

:cheers:

Forget it! The 3rd party component used for search, does not allow hot keys. :thumbsup:

Peter

#17 MedEvil

MedEvil

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 7771 posts

Posted 27 May 2010 - 01:53 PM

Not to press for it and no idea about Delphi, but wouldn't the GUI (WB) allow it?

:thumbsup:

#18 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12707 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 27 May 2010 - 02:39 PM

Not to press for it and no idea about Delphi, but wouldn't the GUI (WB) allow it?

:thumbsup:

Of course any GUI built with Delphi can handle hot keys. That is Windows standard.
But if a component does catch all keys ...

Peter

#19 MedEvil

MedEvil

    Platinum Member

  • .script developer
  • 7771 posts

Posted 27 May 2010 - 03:31 PM

But the component does not catch all keys.
All my global hotkeys keep working. To test Fx keys, i assigned F7 to start calc. Works fine with the editor having the focus.

:thumbsup:

#20 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12707 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 27 May 2010 - 03:41 PM

But the component does not catch all keys.
All my global hotkeys keep working. To test Fx keys, i assigned F7 to start calc. Works fine with the editor having the focus.

:thumbsup:

New for me! I'm going to test.

Peter

#21 CMS

CMS

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 12 posts
  • Location:Florida
  •  
    United States

Posted 27 May 2010 - 06:57 PM

If you have the script source code editor open:

There is a binocular buttom for "search". Right of it there are two circled arrows for "next" and "previous" and then a symbol for "replace".

What different do you want to suggest?

Peter



I am so non-observant, I totally missed them.....sorry!!!!! Should have opened the editor, and looked, before posting.

#22 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12707 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 28 May 2010 - 07:49 AM

:thumbsup:

Peter




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users