Bob,
Usually supplying the bugzilla url in the mail
makes it easier to jump there and vote for you ;)
Just a thought... suggestion ;)
cheers
Xavier
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Bob Warren
> Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2005 22:5
All,
I vaguely remember from my UNIX and C days that there was a command
named "cb" that was named "Program Beautifier". It took C source file
as input and wrote a file that had the C source in indented and
structured form. There was also a command named "uucleanup" that did a
similar thing
Hi Björnke,
On Jul 01 2005, at 01:29, Dennis Brown wrote:
I would be MORE than happy to segregate my posts into the two
different categories.
There is a lot of traffic on this list, it would make sense to
divide up the traffic into these two areas.
There is an Improve Rev list, but only r
On 7/1/05 4:20 AM, "Bob Warren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can we go back to where it all started?
You post was well said, Bob. I've been using xTalk for decades (ouch!) as
well as VB up through VB 6, and I know exactly what you mean (including the
.NET disenfranchisement).
> So here is the sy
At 10:02 AM -0400 7/1/2005, Thomas McGrath III wrote:
Is that what it is really called? Pretty printing? Or is that a
translation thing?
It just sounds a little funny.
It's an old programming term. (There was - well, still is - a Unix
shell program named "pp" for pretty-print, which takes a
Before Apple made WYSIWYG (what you see (on the screen) is what you
get (on the printer)) the norm, and even before that when displays
were monospaced character (not graphics) oriented, and printers were
also monospaced with just one character set, straight printing was an
ugly unformatted
Thomas McGrath III wrote:
Eric,
Is that what it is really called? Pretty printing? Or is that a
translation thing?
It just sounds a little funny.
It's really called that.
I *think* the name was first used in Lisp back in the 60s certainly
it was in common use by the time I got involv
On Jul 1, 2005, at 5:20 AM, Bob Warren wrote:
Can we go back to where it all started?
Ok, I deleted everything before this post in my mail.
Now, if we can discuss this on the List and arrive at some kind of
consensus
about it, then perhaps we would earn sufficient respect on the part
of
Hi curious Tom :-)
How could you think that I would change a single word from the
Official Revolution Documentation ;-)
No, I just copied/pasted it.
At the time, seems that Rev guys were very happy with this function...
Now, I wonder ;-)
But stay curious: it's a good disease!
Le 1 juil. 05 à
Good idea Jim. I don't know if it will get done but I've seen this
before and it works. I've seen it in using applescript and frontier
runtime etc.
(or maybe that was one editor with multiple language choices?!?!?!)
Thanks
Tom
On Jul 1, 2005, at 8:27 AM, Jim Bufalini wrote:
So, maybe instead
Eric,
Is that what it is really called? Pretty printing? Or is that a
translation thing?
It just sounds a little funny.
Curious Tom
On Jul 1, 2005, at 5:55 AM, Eric Chatonet wrote:
Hi Bob,
As usual with Rev docs, it's somewhere but you are rarely able to find
it...
I'm finishing a plugi
Bob,
I have been using Rev for 1 year now and although I have my frustrating
moments with bugs, as do others, I am confident in Rev's pursuit of
fixing the bugs that bother us all. They are releasing fixes in a much
faster time frame and plan on continuing to do so.
I believe they are focusi
Dennis,
You are right! I am trying to turn it down four notches. Thanks for the
calm post.
I just threw your comments on top of a rather large pile (IMO) and
after reading your post again, I see that that was not fair to do.
Thanks for being on this list and offering your professional and c
Eric:
Excellent post. This points out, specifically, how the two keys (
and ) behave differently, which is part of what has been
frustrating me. The closer these two keys function, the better off we
all will be, I think.
Thanks!
Jon
Eric Chatonet wrote:
Hi Jon,
I tested the following
Jim, Bob,
I agree with you. However remember that you can use anything to edit the
script...
put the script of the selobj into fld 1 of stack "myeditor"
and
set the script of the selobj to fld 1 of stack "Myeditor"
Note that the plugin architecture of RunRev permits to trap the
RevEditScript
Hi Jon,
I tested the following:
on toto
if there is a fld "toto" then
go to cd 1
end if
end toto
1. I typed "on toto" and press return: "end toto" has been
automatically set and the insertion point blinked at the right place
(with the right indentation)
2. I typed "if there is a fl
Bob,
A very reasonable post. As a PC programmer, the Tab key was news to me also.
In the interest of "discussion" here's another idea:
Over the years, I have found that editors (and word processors) are like
religions. Everyone likes the one they are used to and are willing to go to
war over it.
"The Revolution script editor automatically pretty-prints the current
handler when you place the insertion point somewhere in the handler and
press Return or Tab."
I agree that works in this way, but I use all of the
time, and the formatting is often incorrect. Am I missing something, or
Hi Bob,
As usual with Rev docs, it's somewhere but you are rarely able to
find it...
I'm finishing a plugin that finds the following when you enter
"indent" as a search keyword:
Might be useful ;-)
From the Docs FAQs:
How do I pretty print a script?
Pretty printing is the use of indenting t
M Young wrote:
Richard Gaskin Tue, 28 Jun 2005 21:53:49 -0700: A lot of people from a
wide range of programming backgrounds have learned Rev easily with the
help of the folks here.
MY: Very true, however I find that the old x-talk hands on this list
expect all new Rev users to be programming ne
2005 01:35
> To: How to use Revolution
> Subject: Re: Suggestion for correcting the IDE's script
> editor AND Endlessranting and rude insults AND other points
>
>
> On Jul 01 2005, at 01:29, Dennis Brown wrote:
>
> > I would be MORE than happy to segregate
Thomas,
Please turn your sensitivity knob down two notches and stop stirring
up the pot. My comments were not meant to insult or be rude to
anyone, and in rereading them, I can't see that they are, but you
have labeled them so. You are actually inciting more discussion and
rudeness than
My point was that people on this list - not RunRev themselves - are
both more inclined and more able to offer workarounds where necessary
than they could possibly be to fix bugs. That is obviously RunRevs job.
I think some of the somewhat heated tenor of some posts recently has
been partly du
The problem is that the discussions turned into insults and rude
comments and they are still going on. The new traffic on the list is
great and the help that this list offers is beyond any list I have ever
seen. But when an intelligent discussion falls into rude comments being
thrown at the "ol
Bjoernke,
Thanks for pointing out that there is a list for those who have
bought the high end "Professional" license to discuss improvements.
That seems like a reasonable thing to have. At least that explains
why I have not been able to elicit much intelligent conversation from
the "old
Björnke von Gierke wrote:
On Jul 01 2005, at 01:29, Dennis Brown wrote:
I would be MORE than happy to segregate my posts into the two
different categories.
There is a lot of traffic on this list, it would make sense to divide
up the traffic into these two areas.
There is an Improve Rev lis
I am on the Improve list and I am very very very very very very far
from rich.
That is rather rude of you to say.
Tom
On Jun 30, 2005, at 7:35 PM, Björnke von Gierke wrote:
On Jul 01 2005, at 01:29, Dennis Brown wrote:
I would be MORE than happy to segregate my posts into the two
differe
There is the improve list at Revolution.
Tom
On Jun 30, 2005, at 7:29 PM, Dennis Brown wrote:
I did not find much in this or any other posts on this subject very
helpful compared to the volume of email taken up --except for one
point:
Helping with scripting questions is what this list shoul
MY,
There is the improve list at Revolution where requests and improvements
are made. I believe you need to be an Enterprise Owner to sign up for
that list.
And as far as your comments on everyone else's comments: Most sounded
reasonable. I agreed with a few and disagreed with others. But th
On Jul 01 2005, at 01:29, Dennis Brown wrote:
I would be MORE than happy to segregate my posts into the two
different categories.
There is a lot of traffic on this list, it would make sense to divide
up the traffic into these two areas.
There is an Improve Rev list, but only rich people are
I did not find much in this or any other posts on this subject very
helpful compared to the volume of email taken up --except for one point:
Helping with scripting questions is what this list should be about.
Not everyone wants to debate the shortcomings --some just want advice
on how to o
Michael:
Interesting post: thanks!
Jon
M Young wrote:
Hello everyone,
I know that I have not yet offered much scripting help etc. to others
on this list since I do not feel I know Revolution well enough yet to
offer good suggestions, but I would like to comment on a few things
that I hav
Hello everyone,
I know that I have not yet offered much scripting help etc. to others
on this list since I do not feel I know Revolution well enough yet to
offer good suggestions, but I would like to comment on a few things
that I have seen posted on this list recently in several threads. I
h
As Mark said, i too have used a myriad script editors, i too watched in
total delight the war of rants carpet bombing today's mailist delivery in
favor of more "single-minded" it-has-to-work-this-way-or-it-s-worthless
attitude. While this is a common MacOnly or PC-only user affliction, i've
seen so
Jeanne A. E. DeVoto wrote:
At 12:27 PM +0100 6/29/2005, Alex Tweedly wrote:
Or turn off the auto-format feature, for heaven's sake. It's not as
though it were difficult, if you want to manually format scripts to
your liking.
It prevents "live-formatting" - but it still allows TAB to reform
At 12:27 PM +0100 6/29/2005, Alex Tweedly wrote:
Or turn off the auto-format feature, for heaven's sake. It's not as
though it were difficult, if you want to manually format scripts to
your liking.
It prevents "live-formatting" - but it still allows TAB to reformat
the entire handler, thereby
Jon,
You're not coming off as annoying... just very set in your ways.
Indenting style is a personal preference and Rev indents the way I've
seen all xTalks indent and the way I like to do it... a holdover from
very old debugging habits using a ruler on printouts to check for
proper loopin
Mark:
Great post!
Jon
Mark Waddingham wrote:
Hi all,
I've been reading this thread this morning and it does seem to have
become somewhat of a 'holy war' which I'm sure is not what anybody
intended.
I have used, and use on a daily basis, a myriad of IDEs - including the
more recent ones men
Hi all,
I've been reading this thread this morning and it does seem to have
become somewhat of a 'holy war' which I'm sure is not what anybody
intended.
I have used, and use on a daily basis, a myriad of IDEs - including the
more recent ones mentioned by individuals involved in this thread. Most
Hello,
I did not follow the whole thread since the list is growing every day
and due to time difference, I find about 60 new contributions when I
wake up each morning...
But I have to say that I *never* had any problem with the indent
feature:
As long as you consider that indenting is the
Jeanne A. E. DeVoto wrote:
Or turn off the auto-format feature, for heaven's sake. It's not as
though it were difficult, if you want to manually format scripts to
your liking.
Because de-selecting that button doesn't turn it off completely.
It prevents "live-formatting" - but it still allo
Truth...
:)
Jon
Richard Gaskin wrote:
Thomas McGrath III wrote:
I don't know Jacqueline, I found it right away since I wanted to
become proficient with Rev and naturally looked up the shortcuts.
tab seemed natural to me coming from SC and HC before that.
I've seen tab used for indenti
It sounds to me as if Tom, coming from HC and SC, found some things to
be "natural", while I, coming from the UCSD Pascal P-System Advanced
System Editor (pre-dates the IBM PC entirely), and then, with lots of
grumbling, Delphi, find it not-so-natural.
I've heard lots of defenders for the curr
Jaque:
Thanks for the polite explanation. I wondered whether this might have
been because early Macs did not have function keys (I don't recall: I
had a Fat Mac decades ago, but then gave up on trying to support both
platforms). In that case, the designers had few choices, and I guess
that
Tom:
Sorry that my rhetoric has gotten out of hand. I'll try to tone it back.
I agree that I did not read the docs. I disagree that using a printing
key for a non-printing function is intuitive or good design.
Jon
Thomas McGrath III wrote:
Actually you sound very annoying and you seem t
Chipp:
I'm slightly annoyed at the auto-format feature ( key), because it
does not support my particular and unconventional style, but I accept that.
I'm much more frustrated with what I see as the buggy way the
auto-indent feature works. It gets in the way more often than it helps,
and I'v
Well said, Bob!
Jon
Bob Warren wrote:
I can sum up a little on what I object to in the script editor by saying
that I expect an editor to do what I want it to do, not what IT wants ME to
do. Automatic formatting may well be an advantage in a number of respects,
but at what cost? What's the go
I don't think anyone has really suggested that you shouldn't mind. But
it's the nature of this list for people to offer workarounds and show
examples of how they deal with things. For what it's worth, I agree
that the script editor is buggy in it's formatting, but not so much
that you can't wor
Bob Warren wrote:
P.S. Sorry about some of the lines above that have orphaned a few odd
words here and there. I need a new editor!
In its most basic form, a Rev script editor is just a field in a stack.
The field is loaded with the script in response to the editScript
message (trappable in a
Dear David,
Please see my answers below, interspersed with your comments.
>I should probably just stay out of this, but a few comments have my
>dander up. First, distinguish more clearly between bugs and style.
Point taken. I think you're right. However, at the moment it is a little
difficult t
Jeanne A. E. DeVoto wrote:
Or turn off the auto-format feature, for heaven's sake. It's not as
though it were difficult, if you want to manually format scripts to your
liking.
Are you kidding me? ROFL!!!
Yep, it's right there in the Prefs. aha!
-Chipp
--
No virus found in this outgoing mes
At 10:51 PM -0500 6/28/2005, Chipp Walters wrote:
In a quick search of all the back use-revolution posts, I could only
find 6 references to "indent + script + editor" in over 262,000
posts, and none of them shared your individual concerns. Perhaps
it's time to make a note in Bugzilla for a feat
Thomas McGrath III wrote:
I don't know Jacqueline, I found it right away since I wanted to become
proficient with Rev and naturally looked up the shortcuts.
tab seemed natural to me coming from SC and HC before that.
I've seen tab used for indentint in a lot of editors. In fact, most of 'em.
I don't know Jacqueline, I found it right away since I wanted to become
proficient with Rev and naturally looked up the shortcuts.
tab seemed natural to me coming from SC and HC before that.
Tom
On Jun 29, 2005, at 12:06 AM, J. Landman Gay wrote:
On 6/28/05 5:54 PM, Jon wrote:
> And, BTW, I
On 6/28/05 5:54 PM, Jon wrote:
> And, BTW, I NEVER would have guessed that the key did ANYTHING
> other than enter characters into the text. This is a great
> example of a totally bizarre UI that you folks have become so used to
> that you can't see the strangeness of it.
Not an excuse, but a
Bob,
I understand both you and Jon are frustrated by the indenting of the
script editor and it's duly noted. It's difficult to switch paradigms.
In a quick search of all the back use-revolution posts, I could only
find 6 references to "indent + script + editor" in over 262,000 posts,
and non
Actually you sound very annoying and you seem to blatantly want to
attack everyone on the list with rude comments. It is getting quite
old by now.
I for one read the docs and saw that tab forces the formatting. So
maybe instead of constantly bitching you should read the docs.
tom
On Jun 2
I should probably just stay out of this, but a few comments have my
dander up. First, distinguish more clearly between bugs and style. To
those of you from other backgrounds, x-talk is different. Many of us
like it this way. There are more important things for the developers to
be doing than
I can sum up a little on what I object to in the script editor by saying
that I expect an editor to do what I want it to do, not what IT wants ME to
do. Automatic formatting may well be an advantage in a number of respects,
but at what cost? What's the good of it if it makes the most simple
operati
>
> We could argue all month about style but
As I said "We could argue all month about style " and, knowing this list, we
will.
Putting "end" in line with the statements is inconsistent with the standard
xTalk way of handling handlers:
Well, not much to argue really. In C, there are at le
Alex Tweedly wrote:
Jon wrote:
OK, so, here is how I would like code to be formatted (not that I
expect it to change, just FYI).
if [statement] then
[statements]
end if -- note I always line my ENDs up with the internal statements
There is a reason for this: if I want to clip the f
n for correcting the IDE's script editor
> 1. A global (not global variables but across the main stack and sub-
> stacks
> or, at least, one stack) find/search/replace function would be
> extremely
> useful, given that script can be in objects, cards, libraries, the
> stack,
> e
In a message dated 6/28/05 3:24:45 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > We could argue all month about style but
>
As I said "We could argue all month about style " and, knowing this list, we
will.
Putting "end" in line with the statements is inconsistent with the standard
xTalk way of handl
Jon wrote:
OK, so, here is how I would like code to be formatted (not that I
expect it to change, just FYI).
if [statement] then
[statements]
end if -- note I always line my ENDs up with the internal statements
There is a reason for this: if I want to clip the final line out, I
can ju
Oh, one more thing. How do you turn on line numbers in the script
editor?
I don;t think you can, but you can go to a specific line. There is a
btton in the bottom left corner of the script editor window, just
above the Apply button. Clicking this cycles through 3 different
states: auto-co
1. A global (not global variables but across the main stack and sub-
stacks
or, at least, one stack) find/search/replace function would be
extremely
useful, given that script can be in objects, cards, libraries, the
stack,
etc.
Find & Replace in the Edit menu allows you to specify where you
J. Landman Gay wrote:
I am very used to unaligned scripts until I hit the tab key; that's
been the standard in all xtalks for almost 20 years.
I think the point is that it is technically possible to have editors
that provide the auto-format AND also allow one to only rarely have
"unalign
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We could argue all month about style but, for the benefit of anyone
interested, here's how I do it:
OK, so, here is how I would like code to be formatted (not that I expect
it to change, just FYI).
if [short statement] then [short statement]
if [long statement] t
Jim Bufalini wrote:
As a newcomer, I may as well add my 2-cents here.
1. A global (not global variables but across the main stack and sub-stacks
or, at least, one stack) find/search/replace function would be extremely
useful, given that script can be in objects, cards, libraries, the stack,
e
In a message dated 6/28/05 2:25:02 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
if a then
if b then get c else get d
else
doSomethingElse
end if
It generates:
if a then
if b then get c else get d
else
doSomethingElse
end if
I get the same response (OS X 10.4.1, Rev 2.5.1) however
Oh, one more thing. How do you turn on line numbers in the script editor?
Jim
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.
As a newcomer, I may as well add my 2-cents here.
1. A global (not global variables but across the main stack and sub-stacks
or, at least, one stack) find/search/replace function would be extremely
useful, given that script can be in objects, cards, libraries, the stack,
etc.
As a newcomer especi
Jacqueline,
I have not seen the script editor mess up the formatting with this
simple example, but it does mess up horribly in some situations. I
actually have to rewrite my scripts differently because it gets
confused at times.
The main problem is when you have a situation like this:
i
On 6/28/05 3:27 PM, Bob Warren wrote:
I think
that what is involved here is the old story that those who have used Rev for
a long time have unconsciously learned to avoid its potholes. Less
experienced users suffer more. Why shouldn't I be able to do an "if-then" as
I described above? I didn't h
at something as fundamental and crucial as
the declaration of Global variables only half works and has always been the
same? It is beyond my comprehension.
- Original Message -
From: "Chipp Walters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Bob Warren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Paul:
Total disagreement. The manual auto-indent features (that work while
entering text, not the feature that re-formats an entire handler) are
horribly buggy, when compared with the VB and Delphi editors. The UI
for the editor does not need to change: it can remain "quick and
intuitive".
Chipp:
See comments embedded below
Chipp Walters wrote:
Hi Bob,
Thanks for your thoughts. As one who used to use the VBscript editor,
I can offer these observations:
1) Ever since HyperCard first was released, the script editor
'auto-formatted' the scripts. Users are used to this. In fact
Jon,
There are actually two issues here:
1. I agree that there are significant bugs in the debugger/script
editor/variable watcher; these should be fixed.
2. I disagree with changes to the interface of the script editor. It works
quickly and intuitively.
Paul Looney
_
AIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 11:30 AM
Subject: Re: Suggestion for correcting the IDE's script editor
Yes, why complicate the script editor with a bunch of obscure commands
and dubious "shortcuts"?
-Original Message-
From: Bob
Hi Bob,
Thanks for your thoughts. As one who used to use the VBscript editor, I
can offer these observations:
1) Ever since HyperCard first was released, the script editor
'auto-formatted' the scripts. Users are used to this. In fact, when I
first started using VBscript, I saw where the code
Dear All,
My original e-mail suggesting how the Rev editor could be reviewed is
obviously open to misinterpretation, so I think a summary of a few points
would help.
1. Obviously, debugging the existing Rev editor is important.
It gets confused far too often.
2. It could well be simplified by no
-
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 11:30 AM
Subject: Re: Suggestion for correcting the IDE's script editor
Yes, why complicate the script editor with a bunch of obscure commands
and dubious "shortcuts"?
-Original M
82 matches
Mail list logo
