 |
AutoHotkey Community
Let's help each other out
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Lexikos
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
Posts: 2558
Location: Australia, Qld
|
 Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 2:26 pm Post subject: Re: rhetorical post |
 |
|
| Sean wrote: | I'd like to emphasize again:
The real question is not about why should not use the fast mode, but about why should use the fast mode in spite of its less-safe nature. |
In what way is it less safe? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Sean
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Posts: 1336
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lexikos
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
Posts: 2558
Location: Australia, Qld
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If you're talking about: | Chris wrote: | | If it becomes the default and is ever used by mistake, the script might begin displaying unpredictable behavior that would be very difficult to track down and isolate. |
...the cause of such behaviour would be the function running in whatever thread it "interrupted." As I have tried to explain, the thread interrupted will always be the DispInterface thread, so this is not an issue. It is no more error-prone than directly calling the function.
In any case, it is not likely worth further discussion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sean
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Posts: 1336
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 1:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I updated COM.ahk. The corresponding COM event functions now receive two parameters like Web_BeforeNavigate2(pDispParams, psink). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sean
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Posts: 1336
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 12:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I reuploaded COM.ahk as there was an obvious bug with new functions
| Code: | | COM_Init(bOLE = False) / COM_Term(bOLE = False) |
which are wrappers around
| Code: | COM_CoInitialize() / COM_CoUninitialize() ; bOLE = False
COM_OleInitialize() / COM_OleUninitialize() ; bOLE = True |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chris
Site Admin
Joined: 02 Mar 2004
Posts: 10467
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sean, thanks for all the great work on COM.ahk. I hope to distribute this and/or www.autohotkey.net/~easycom/ in the stdlib soon. (But since I know so little about COM, I keep having to refresh my memory about what the differences are.)
In case it affects your plans, what lexikos said about a callback's fast mode is correct: it shouldn't matter whether a fast-callback thread is interrupted by another thread. This is because by definition, whichever thread interrupted it will restore the proper settings for the fast-callback, which by definition are the proper settings for the thread beneath the fast-callback. This is because AutoHotkey "threads" always collapse in reverse order (i.e. no multithreading). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joy2DWorld
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Posts: 422
Location: Galil, Israel
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 8:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
@Chris,
The advancement that Sean has made to AHK is almost beyond comprehension.
How to put this... for example, using a simple command " Invoke() ",
you can now, with AHK, directly control *any* part of any webpage being displayed in IExplorer on your machine.
as for windows scripting,
| Code: | psc := ActiveXObject("MSScriptControl.ScriptControl") ; Handle to script control instance
Invoke(psc, "Language=", "JScript") ; sent langauge to Java for this instance
msgbox % wow := Invoke(psc, "Eval", "sh=new ActiveXObject(""WScript.Shell"");`nsh.Popup('Hello, world!', 2); sh ") ; invokes EVAL for the javascript sh=... which sets an active X object inside java to create the popup
invoke(wow, "Popup","Sean, this is really, really cool!!!!") ; the same thing, using the same handle, directly for AHK!
Release(psc)
CoUninitialize() |
or more simply ?
| Code: | CoInitialize()
wow := ActiveXObject("WScript.Shell")
invoke(wow, "Popup","Hello world!",2)
Release(wow)
CoUninitialize() |
but then again,
what do i know...
edit: it looks to complex so, retry:
| Code: | psc := ActiveXObject("MSScriptControl.ScriptControl")
Invoke(psc, "Language=", "JScript")
JavaCode := "x = 'WOW' ; x" ; whatever and as much java code you want !!
result := Invoke(psc, "Eval", JavaCode)
Release(psc)
CoUninitialize() |
which my AHK errors on on the JavaCode := line (????)
so last try:
| Code: | com_CoInitialize()
psc := com_ActiveXObject("MSScriptControl.ScriptControl")
com_Invoke(psc, "Language=", "JScript")
JavaCode =
(
x = "Wow" ;
x
) ; whatever and as much java code you want !!
result := com_Invoke(psc, "Eval", JavaCode)
com_Release(psc)
com_CoUninitialize()
msgbox % result |
_________________
Joyce Jamce |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sean
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Posts: 1336
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 1:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Chris wrote: | | In case it affects your plans, what lexikos said about a callback's fast mode is correct: it shouldn't matter whether a fast-callback thread is interrupted by another thread. This is because by definition, whichever thread interrupted it will restore the proper settings for the fast-callback, which by definition are the proper settings for the thread beneath the fast-callback. This is because AutoHotkey "threads" always collapse in reverse order (i.e. no multithreading). |
Thanks for the clarification. lexicos had said that, and I think I must apologize him for that, I didn't read his post very carefully at the time. I should've read AHK's source-code myself to discuss it properly.
BTW, what I'd really like to know was/is how much performance the Fast mode gains over the default Slow mode. I switched from Fast to (default) Slow at some time, not because I actually met a problem with the Fast mode, but because there had been nothing Slow mode couldn't do where Fast mode could do, so I decided to stick with the default.
Anyway, I may reconsider adding Fast mode. In the same token, I may add Cdecl too. Due to the (undocumented) stack correction procedure at the end of DllCall, I believe Cdecl is actually faster than Stdcall. Although it's undocumented, I suppose it's unlikely to change as it makes DllCall really robust against crash. May I assume it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chris
Site Admin
Joined: 02 Mar 2004
Posts: 10467
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 1:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sean wrote: | | ...how much performance the Fast mode gains over the default Slow mode. |
The perceived impact on performance probably depends mostly on how many calls are made to the callback in a short period of time. If thousands of calls are made in a few seconds, "Fast" could help a lot. If performance is important, it's probably best to benchmark it for that particular task.
| Sean wrote: | | Due to the (undocumented) stack correction at the end of DllCall, I believe Cdecl is actually faster than Stdcall. Although it's undocumented, I suppose it's unlikely to change as it makes DllCall very robust against crash. May I assume it? |
Although I can't say for sure that Cdecl is faster, in theory "yes" (due to the way DllCall is implemented). However, I suspect the difference is negligible compared to Fast vs. Slow mode. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sean
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Posts: 1336
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 2:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The script is updated. Cdecl Fast options are added to the callback. Thanks to lexikos and Chris. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sean
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Posts: 1336
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 4:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
A new function is added, COM_ScriptControl(sCode, sLanguage = "", bEval = False), which executes external VBScript/JScript/etc.
Example:
| Code: | Code=
(
sh=new ActiveXObject("WScript.Shell");
sh.Popup('Hello, world!', 2);
)
COM_ScriptControl(Code, "JScript")
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
majkinetor
Joined: 24 May 2006
Posts: 3626
Location: Belgrade
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joy2DWorld
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Posts: 422
Location: Galil, Israel
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
likely am mssing something basic, but with
| Code: | objWord = com_CreateObject("Word.Application")
|
am unable to see my way to:
| Code: | | objWord.Documents.Open("FILE") |
or
| Code: | | com_Invoke(objWord, "Documents") |
also brought no joy...
suggestions ?
_________________
Joyce Jamce |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lexikos
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
Posts: 2558
Location: Australia, Qld
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joy2DWorld wrote: | likely am mssing something basic, but with
| Code: | objWord = com_CreateObject("Word.Application")
|
|
Make sure you used ":=" and not "=" in your actual code. Also, I don't have Word installed, but...
| Code: | | objWord.Documents.Open("FILE") |
...should translate to...
| Code: | Documents := COM_Invoke(objWord, "Documents")
COM_Invoke(Documents, "Open", "FILE")
COM_Release(Documents) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joy2DWorld
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Posts: 422
Location: Galil, Israel
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 1:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
sorry,
code was figurative, not literal..
| Code: | com_CoInitialize()
objWord := com_CreateObject("Word.Application")
msgbox % objword
msgbox % invoke(objWord,"Documents")
|
also tried variants of (objword, "Documents=", "Open)
_________________
Joyce Jamce |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
