Wow nice job, there!lexikos wrote:... I went to considerable lengths to minimize the impact that these new features have on code size. The result is that this build is smaller than the previous one.
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
Wow nice job, there!lexikos wrote:... I went to considerable lengths to minimize the impact that these new features have on code size. The result is that this build is smaller than the previous one.
+1, language is evolving fast, i can't keep up. i'm surprised this stuff is even being considered for v1. personally would've preferred all of this to go into v2. just seems more fitting since v2 nudges users into using functions/expressions anyway.fincs wrote:With every single new test build posted here, I feel more and more like the version number deserves bumping to v1.2 due to so many major changes to how AutoHotkey works.
in your mind, whats necessary to deem it "complete"? whats missing currently and are those necessary? why cant you just call it "complete" right now and then bump additions as v2.01 etc?lexikos wrote: I don't see v2 being complete any time soon, but I want to actually use these features. This is also meant in part as a sort of stepping stone to v2. The further v2 diverges from v1, the harder it will be to get users to switch.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests