AutoHotkey Community

[Chris]

It is planned to distribute useful .ahk functions with AutoHotkey. To make the use of these "standard library functions" as convenient as possible, the plan is to automatically include a function from its external file whenever a script calls it by name (as long as the script doesn't already have a function of that name).

For example, if a script calls the function EncryptRC4() yet does not contain (or explicitly include) such a function, the file that matches the name of the function -- namely EncryptRC4.ahk -- would be automatically included from the user library or standard library.

The user library would be the directory such as My Documents\AutoHotkey\Library (exact name to be determined). This directory is purely optional: it would not get created by the installer. But if present, AutoHotkey would look there first for a match; if a match isn't found, it would then look in the standard library, which would be in the Library subfolder where AutoHotkey.exe is located.

Since the one-function-per-file approach would be cumbersome for its author to maintain when a feature-set has many functions, it was proposed that when a lookup fails to find an exact match, it should try to match just the prefix (if the function's name has a prefix). For example, if MyClass_Init.ahk doesn't exist but MyClass.ahk does, MyClass would be auto-included. Clearly this raises the possibility of naming collisions and ambiguity; but maybe the benefits are worth it.

Comments are welcome.

[engunneer]

I would prefer to set my own user library directory, and maybe even standard library, though that is not required.

Also, will/can AHK search all ahk files in the library for a function? or will it just go by file name?

which takes precedence, user or standard library?

perhaps the user library could be indicated in the script using #Library Path\To\Library?

Also, my "Other" vote - Lib and UserLib or just Lib for both.
_________________
Unless otherwise noted, all code is untested.
Common Answers: 1.(Loops, Viruses, etc.) 2. Search 3.RTFM

[Chris]

[Laszlo]

I often make experimental versions of include files, and it is not a good idea to overwrite the standard include file. If the same directory is used, saving/renaming the standard include file was necessary, because explicit paths are more cumbersome (especially if I move the script or give it to someone). Also, batch renaming or other cleanup operations are often performed in our own include directory, which should not touch the standard library, otherwise some other scripts might stop working. Therefore, different directory names are safer and more convenient. I voted for StdLib/UserLib.

[toralf]

voted StdLib/UserLib
_________________
Ciao
toralf

[SKAN]

I voted: \Stdlib and \Userlib

[Chris]

I should clarify that the directories are separate even if they have the same name. For example:

[majkinetor]

I voted: \Stdlib and \Userlib

This directories should be named differently as I will definitely keep them on the same place.
_________________

[Laszlo]

Even if the directories are in different locations, it is better to name them differently, so that they cannot be mistaken to each other, when someone explores the directory tree. Some file managers show only the end of the current path, which ought to be enough to distinguish between user- and standard libraries, not to accidentally change files in the wrong place.

[corrupt]

[majkinetor]

[corrupt]

[majkinetor]

[corrupt]

[majkinetor]

If I can not put them where I want, this is stupid, I want even discuss it.
_________________