The existence value of old objects

Discuss the future of the AutoHotkey language
arcticir
Posts: 693
Joined: 17 Nov 2013, 11:32

The existence value of old objects

Post by arcticir » 30 Apr 2021, 22:28

V2 deleted the old objects, which I always regret. On the eve of beta's upcoming release, I want to discuss again whether it has the value of existence.
I must admit that the new object can realize all the functions of the old object, but it is more complicated.
V2 becomes rigorous, which is a good thing. However, we must keep in mind that most novice users of AutoHotkey have no programming foundation and do not want to learn programming. They just need a convenient tool.
When novices learn AutoHotkey because of their interest in AutoHotkey, the old objects will be more friendly than the new ones.
Old objects are similar to Lua table. Almost all lua users express their love for "table", which is extremely simple but powerful.
Lua has brought all the advantages of "table" into full play. Why should we delete the same simple and friendly old objects as disadvantages?




----

Yes, I am one of the "most users" who don't want to learn programming. I remember I found a piece of code in a forum and used it for several months. :D It is similar to:

Code: Select all

::qm:: This is my signature, I am cool.

swagfag
Posts: 6222
Joined: 11 Jan 2017, 17:59

Re: The existence value of old objects

Post by swagfag » 01 May 2021, 09:37

what is this supposed problem ure describing? i dont know what a "friendly object" refers to. use examples

i can only imagine ure talking about the fact that it is no longer somewhat straightforward to enumerate and access keys(v1 lingo) dynamically as u typically would in v1. why is that an issue?
  • v2 newcomers who are oblivious to v1 will see(and hopefully understand) the types of collections that are available and what their purpose is, take it for granted and use them accordingly(ie use a Map), instead of trying to retrofit the v1 model of working with objects.
    I must admit that the new object can realize all the functions of the old object, but it is more complicated.
    (scores brownie points for the degree of flexibility awarded by v2, but thats neither here nor there) the point is, ure not supposed to - instead choose a better suited abstraction for the task at hand(ie use a Map)
  • people switching from v1 to v2 are not novices, so theyre expected to be able to handle themselves
  • novices using v1 will keep using v1, until theyre ready/willing to make the switch
cant comment on the lua bits, since im only vaguely familiar with it, but maybe u can elaborate. im sure there must be people that also have their gripes with "table".
novice users of AutoHotkey have no programming foundation and do not want to learn programming. They just need a convenient tool.
id argue a more correct and consistent tool is infinitely more useful/desirable, than a convenient one that conveniently(see what i did there?) sweeps the rug from out under u when u least expect it to - yes, im talking about the silent suppression of errors

about learning to program... if u aint doing just hotkey remaps, ure already programming, my guy. and if ure instead talking about not wanting to learn the constructs of ur language of choice, then i dont know what to say really. no one was born with this knowledge, so one way or another ull have to learn it, if u want to progress

arcticir
Posts: 693
Joined: 17 Nov 2013, 11:32

Re: The existence value of old objects

Post by arcticir » 02 May 2021, 04:56

your point of view is very powerful. :D
I did learn programming because of ahk.

Post Reply

Return to “AutoHotkey Development”