AutoHotkey Community

[jonny]

I have not read much of the post, but I will say that I am thinking about possibly rejoining the AutoHotkey community after this semester or sooner, possibly as a developer. As I can see the implications of an AHK2 focusing on extensibility and (at the basic level) simplicity, that would probably be my primary focus, once I'd had enough time to familiarize myself with the code base.

This has no premonitory undertones, it is merely speculation. Assume nothing yet. I might not be able to contribute at all this [school] year.

Also see my post in General Chat.

[AHKnow*]

I like a lot of the things you guys have typed...

I would just like to add my slightly different perspective.

I think the size of AHK is not that much of an issue. This does not seem so much of an issue to me because hard drives, RAM, CPU, connection speeds, etc... keep getting bigger and faster. As long as the size increases are small and worthwhile, I really don't see any problems.

To me the biggest issue would be the complexity versus ease of use and ease of understanding of the syntax.

What makes AHK a joy to use is the easy to understand, yet very powerful syntax. Take the AHK command "Loop" for example... I mean damn, its simplicity is brilliant. A loop is a loop, is a loop. Why make the syntax complex, when all you will be doing is the "same thing"?

See, I think right there is the "trick". Sometimes simplification, but powerful, is the hardest thing to do. So, instead what you often get is simple and weak or overly complex/difficult to use and powerful. Making something complex, can be so very attractive, because you have understood the basics. It can make you want to "branch out" into numerous areas of complexity. Then later, when you truly become a "master"/"expert", you look back and understood that you could have made it much easier on yourself and others. Excuse the digression, but there are some Chinese Kung Fu expressions that have meanings somewhat like I previously typed. Also, something being overly simple is a kind of trap too, since you often can't use it or have to use something else to get the job done.

AHK has achieved something that other programming languages have not, the right balance of simplicity and power(so far). If AHK continues to maintain this balance, it will continue to become even more popular.

If anything, AHK should continue to look at what other programming languages are making ever more complex, harder to use, harder to understand, and instead avoid making such a mess.

I think a new feature should be added because it is providing some functionality that AHK does not have and would be really, really useful. At the same time, the syntax and the way such a feature would be used should be throughly examined and simplified as much as possible. This simplification often adds to the usability of the new feature and makes sure new or casual users can understand it if they need it. We already have lots complex programming languages out there (Assembly, arguably C++ (arguably)), messy languages (arguably Perl), as well as excessive simple to the point of useless ( see leopard, www.leopardprogramming.com/source.php )

Perhaps, AHK people should be very careful to maintain AHK's balance of simplicity and power, otherwise it may fall into the same traps as other programming languages.

[BoBo]

@ AHKnow*
Thx mate. Your statement should be a mandatory reading for all of those who even think about to make Autohotkey a 120% AutoIt clone. Much appreciated.

[Chris]

[AHKnow*]

[AHKnow*]

[automaticman]

[majkinetor]

Its expectable.

AHK is n00b oriented. And n00bs have no standard


As such, author of AHK denies advanced programming concepts needed for proper encapsulation of libraries. That is the reason for hundreed of wishes and some talks about using other languages with AHK functionality.

AHK is still lang designed for 10liner code. Doing everything more advanced is more trouble then anything else, and when things become just a little more demanding you are out of scope of the language.

I don't beleive this will change (soon) especialy if Chris remains the only author (i.e. with no code-branch) as it has different goals for AHK.
_________________

[automaticman]

[majkinetor]

I tried to make some standards here but I was not successiful.
Do you think the excel and word users who want to optimize their accounting workflow will care much here? Or some gamers?

[automaticman]

? Can't we do this with the current existing AutoHotkey already (without having to add any other extra magic features)?
I think one of the bigger error sources in AutoHotkey is (apart from general code design failures)

• if mouse clicks are involved
  
• if some code/automation is tried to run in a wrong state
  
• if the computer sometimes runs too slowly and can't fulfill the initially required conditions at the right time
  

[majkinetor]

[automaticman]

[majkinetor]

define "background layer" first.

Is it control ? Picture ? Can be both ? browser ? Is it a plane ? bird ?
_________________

[automaticman]