- Right now, AutoHotkey does not need anything essentially *new* to become reputable. So in effect it doesn't really require 'development' to become reputable. Fundamentally it needs to repackage commands as functions, and that's it. When I introduce programmers to AutoHotkey, I do so with function versions of commands, there are enough things to get used to (in any programming language) without commands that each have individualistic syntax traits.
- Right now, I believe that getting good programmers in to write good AutoHotkey scripts, is more important than improving AutoHotkey v1/v2. By attracting say 5 to 10 more programmers gifted in COM for example, the forum would be comparable in quality to Stack Overflow. And I believe that that that should be done by editing the documentation to make it clear that some commands/functions are deprecated e.g. StringReplace v. StrReplace. And to make an official/semi-official 'commands as functions' library. This is what AutoHotkey needs to be 'reputable', in my opinion, and that's been obvious for at least a decade.
- I would propose that instead of waiting for AHK v2, to make AutoHotkey reputable, the AHK leadership might say, 'OK we believe that these functions are ready for AHK v1, let's have a month's consultation period, to delay releasing any controversial functions, then release them with the installer (as AHK or C++), they can still be changed in future, but we expect that the need is unlikely'.
@derz00: I don't know what you think I have or haven't addressed re. nnnik's points. Here are some specifics.
We need to attract more people then (to AHK, some of whom will know C++), and any willing devs need to work out how/if they can be helpful to lexikos and offer their services.The issue with AHK v2 is that currently nobody is actively developing it besides lexikos.
I don't really understand this point. All we need is the AHK leadership to say here is an official/semi-official AHK lib of functions for AHK v1 commands. Almost nothing and almost nobody are needed to smooth the transition.What AutoHotkey lacks right now is developers not someone that will smooth the transition from AHK v1 to AHK v2.
We need to attract developers of AHK scripts now, and of C++ for the future. Those people are probably the same people.We don't need to attract developers that might help with the project in the far future.
There have been times when AHK urgently needed new features. But not now. Obviously I welcome every AHK development, major or minor. I want 'reputable' AHK now (achievable with one ahk file lib, that I've been keeping up-to-date), and AHK v2 when it's ripe, and not expedited.We need someone that develops and we need this person now.
Warum fragst du nicht lexikos?It is difficult for me to tell in which direction lexikos wants to take AHK.
[EDIT:] I have almost finished converting all my main scripts, it's slower than it would have been because I'm trying to create scripts for automating conversion as I go along, plus I was waiting for any AHK v2 updates. I'll have a great collection of notes, comments and scripts, perhaps within the next few weeks.
[EDIT:] Going through this post, it's quite clear why the move to functions wasn't faster/didn't really start until AHK v2 alpha. That's not really a criticism per se, but it has been quite unfortunate in terms of the growth and reputation of AHK. Nevertheless, the reputation has grown, and it will be fixed in the near future, it will be where it should be.
Commands as functions - Scripts and Functions - AutoHotkey Community
https://autohotkey.com/board/topic/3531 ... functions/