Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post a reply


In an effort to prevent automatic submissions, we require that you complete the following challenge.
Smilies
:D :) ;) :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :!: :?: :idea: :| :mrgreen: :geek: :ugeek: :arrow: :angel: :clap: :crazy: :eh: :lolno: :problem: :shh: :shifty: :sick: :silent: :think: :thumbup: :thumbdown: :salute: :wave: :wtf: :yawn: :facepalm: :bravo: :dance: :beard: :morebeard: :xmas: :HeHe: :trollface: :cookie: :rainbow: :monkeysee: :monkeysay: :happybday: :headwall: :offtopic: :superhappy: :terms: :beer:
View more smilies

BBCode is ON
[img] is OFF
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by burque505 » 15 Sep 2020, 07:04

Thanks @mfeemster, that's great news.
Regards,
burque505

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by SOTE » 15 Sep 2020, 01:16

mfeemster wrote:
13 Sep 2020, 23:43
I have finished the registry functions. I will move onto the Drive functions next. IronAHK has already started them, so it shouldn't be too much work to put on the finishing touches.

Thanks for the update and good news.
:dance:

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by mfeemster » 13 Sep 2020, 23:43

I have finished the registry functions. I will move onto the Drive functions next. IronAHK has already started them, so it shouldn't be too much work to put on the finishing touches.

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by mfeemster » 03 Sep 2020, 15:26

Thanks @BoBo, I'll keep that user in mind when the time for documentation comes.

I would like to announce that I have finished the file/dir functions. All except for one: FileOpen() because that returns an object and I need to do some more work to get objects fully supported.

I will move onto the registry functions next. IronAHK has already started them, so it shouldn't be too much work to put on the finishing touches.

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by BoBo » 03 Sep 2020, 05:25

@mfeemster mster
Regarding documentation, I've had some thoughts about that myself. I might just start with the AHK documentation, and insert my changes into it. Not sure though, we'll cross that bridge when we get there.
The expert ! regarding the AHK documentation (IMHO by far), and especially for the reason that he's doing it on a constant basis (AFAIK, for ages now) is <f a n f a r e> :salute: :salute: @Ragnar :salute: :salute: Just for the records. I'd guess it's kinda 'must' to get in touch with him sooner or later. Thx for listening :)

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by mfeemster » 01 Sep 2020, 21:56

I have thought about the indexing thing, and have had some conversations with @Chunjee in Discord. Initially, I will leave indexing as 1-based, but will provide a #directive later on.

I am currently still trying to wrap up the file/dir functions. I'm almost done, just been hung up on the Ini file functions for a couple of weeks because I've been busy with other things.

Regarding the virtual desktop link, I've bookmarked it and will give it another look sometime in the future.

Regarding documentation, I've had some thoughts about that myself. I might just start with the AHK documentation, and insert my changes into it. Not sure though, we'll cross that bridge when we get there.

Thanks for the interest. This stuff is slow going, but we'll get there eventually.

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by BoBo » 01 Sep 2020, 16:20

Not sure if this is of any use (i.e. to create a new keysharp/AHK-command) https://stackoverflow.com/a/32527200
Keyword: virtual desktop / Win10

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by SOTE » 27 Aug 2020, 23:57

Chunjee wrote:
27 Aug 2020, 23:13
Using 1 as the starting index; not normal.
That's not entirely true, or at least its not something that outrageous or that AHK doesn't have company. A number of famous programming languages start at 1 or are flexible about it. Pascal/Object Pascal and Ada are flexible. Lua, Smalltalk, COBOL, Fortran, Julia, MATLAB, etc... default is 1. Just saying...

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by Chunjee » 27 Aug 2020, 23:13

In my mind, Keysharp is ahk's best chance to become more compliant with programming norms. Only working on one OS; not normal. Using 1 as the starting index; not normal.

So I encourage Keysharp to make it an option at least.
but as always, I appreciate and encourage OP's efforts and will use Keysharp regardless.

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by SOTE » 27 Aug 2020, 17:55

boiler wrote:
27 Aug 2020, 11:25
Given the goal of making it as much like AHK as possible, it would make the most sense for array indexing to be the same as it is in AHK.
I agree with boiler. The core of those that will use Keysharp will be existing AHK users, that are using or will now experiment with non-Windows OSes, are involved with C# and .NET, or possibly involved in RDA/RPA. Makes sense to keep the switching between variants as smooth as possible. With Keysharp being aligned more with AHK v2, this will probably cause enough issues as it is and with the "moving target issue" since AHK v2 is still evolving and not locked into a Beta yet.

The other very important point would seem to be documentation. With Keysharp sticking close to AHK, people can often refer to the existing AHK help. Allowing Keysharp to keep its help file to just the minimum or differences, because that will take time to do build as well. As a reference, AutoHotkey_H help files kind of does this.

If something is done, than I think joedf's idea seems best, where there is a directive.

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by joedf » 27 Aug 2020, 15:33

Maybe a special directive in the future...? :)

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by Chunjee » 27 Aug 2020, 12:12

I agree but I am also a little tired of ahk's unique arrangement with the index.

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by boiler » 27 Aug 2020, 11:25

Given the goal of making it as much like AHK as possible, it would make the most sense for array indexing to be the same as it is in AHK.

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by Chunjee » 27 Aug 2020, 11:22

I don't see this covered in the OP but will Keysharp be 0 indexed? That would be my preference.

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by kyuuuri » 19 Aug 2020, 01:42

I wish I had that motivation for my projects ahahha. Thank you for everything you are doing!

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by burque505 » 17 Aug 2020, 08:04

@mfeemster, that's tremendous progress. Gives me another reason to look forward to the end of 2020. :D
Regards,
burque505

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by mfeemster » 16 Aug 2020, 21:31

BoBo wrote:
14 Aug 2020, 00:29
:clap: (watching from the sideline) :thumbup:
Glad you are watching. I am making my way through the folders/files functions now. I am about 2/3 done with them. Some were already written in IronAHK to begin with, so that helped push me a little farther down the road. I am just having to change them into the design that I am using, and write unit tests for each one. Some of them were not implemented though, so I had to start from scratch there.

I find that I can implement about 3 functions per day on average, but I don't work on it every day.

So with maybe 150 functions to go, it'll likely be some time near the end of the year that I will have all of them implemented.

Hope that provides some clarity.

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by BoBo » 14 Aug 2020, 00:29

:clap: (watching from the sideline) :thumbup:

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by Chunjee » 11 Aug 2020, 07:18

mfeemster wrote:
11 Aug 2020, 07:14
it makes far more sense to do something like:
retval := func(x, y)

than

func(ref retval, x, y)
jc thank you. I call that output as arguments and it needs to go away forever.

Re: Keysharp - the resurrection of IronAHK

Post by mfeemster » 11 Aug 2020, 07:14

Thanks for the concerns SOTE. I've thought about that too, and I think the pros outweigh the cons. From a programming perspective, it makes far more sense to do something like:


retval := func(x, y)

than

func(ref retval, x, y)

That latter syntax peeves me. So I'm going with V2 where most functions have the former syntax.

Top