v3.0.103 Unstable - Reloaded

[CyberSlug]

Nice updates Just wondering:

Is there any way to embed a pic or avi in a compiled AutoIt script without using FileInstall? Maybe by ResHacking AutoItSC.bin?

[Jon]

Updated with Slider control from JP and some more doc updates.

[Josbe]

Updated with Slider control from JP and some more doc updates.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Great! Brilliant!

I was hoping that it was added(slider) to GUI's code.

Thanks Jon & Paul, again.

[this-is-me]

@Cyber, that is a great idea. That way you could reference it by using @scriptfullpath, -170 or something.

[trids]

I've never actually been that keen that users know of the hidden window tbh...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Is this why Cyberslug's Debug Helper doesn't work anymore?

[SlimShady]

It does work with the version from oct 11th.

I added a line.

Func Debug($message)
   If $message = "#ds" Then
       WinSetState(AutoItWinGetTitle(), "", @SW_SHOW)
       WinActivate(AutoItWinGetTitle())
   ElseIf $message = "#de" Then
       WinWaitClose(AutoItWinGetTitle())
   Else
       Local $previous = ControlGetText( AutoItWinGetTitle(),"", "Edit1")
       ControlSetText( AutoItWinGetTitle(),"", "Edit1", $previous & $message & @CRLF)
   EndIf
EndFunc

Edited October 20, 2004 by SlimShady

[trids]

Thanks Slim! .. I've come to rely on the Hidden Window quite heavily, me.

[Jon]

Updated with the various fixes from JP and holger over the last week (gui refresh, tooltips, etc).

Not added the listview stuff yet as I don't want to duplicate anything in ControlCommand/Listview and we need to think about that.

[Holger]

@Jon: thanks a lot

I don't know if the created function "DirGetSize()" is extremly needed from others (no response ) but however I will send you the function tomorrow cause in a few minutes I'm on the road again and check then later again some bug reports...

So long and regards

Holger

[Henrik]

Updated with the various fixes from JP and holger over the last week (gui refresh, tooltips, etc).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The installer package is still numbered 3.0.103 (same as the previous unstable version). Should it not have been numbered 3.0.104 or greater?

To be precise, http://www.autoitscript.com/autoit3/files/unstable/autoit/ contains a file autoit-v.3.0.103.exe, this file has been there for some days, and has been modified today.

[Chris_1013]

Jon does this nowadays. Back in the pre-release of AutoIt3 the number did increase, but now each new 'build' of the next version doesn't increase the version number. The only way to tell is date and file size will change.

@Jon, ever thought of putting a build number in there which would increase which each new build of the current unstable beta? Or would this be too tricky to manage?

[Holger]

@Chris_1013: what do you mean?

The beta-number increases after an official release of Autoit, so:

Autoit101-beta -> official release -> Autoit102-beta

Autoit102-beta -> official release -> Autoit103-beta

Autoit103-beta -> official release -> Autoit104-beta

But I can't find a new official Autoit3 (103) release!!!...so where is the problem???

I don't know...

BUT: I would not have a problem if after every change the number increases, so maybe 3 times per week

So long

Holger

Edited October 26, 2004 by Holger

[Chris_1013]

As soon as any changes are made to a release version it becomes an unstable beta with a new version number.

i.e., AutoIt 3.0.101 release Then AutoIt 3.0.102 beta

when AutoIt 3.0.102 beta is 'finished' it's released as AutoIt 3.0.102

So, the version we are on and is currently being developed is AutoIt 3.0.103 beta, which will be AutoIt 3.0.103 when it is released.

Hope this makes sense

[tuape]

I think he means that also betas could be identified somehow.

Like using a number to separate betas:

3.0.103_01, 3.0.103_02 etc.

[Holger]

@tuape: ahhh, alright, now I understand ...sorry Chris

[sPeziFisH]

There is a place, not hidden, just not known to everybody

http://www.autoitscript.com/fileman/users/jpm/AutoIt3-gui/history.htm

[Valik]

There is an answer if Jon wants to try it.

First, there is a 4th unused parameter to a version string. Jon doesn't use this field, but it could be useful for keeping track of unstable/beta build numbers.

Second, I wrote a script (In AutoIt, of course) that can be called as a pre-build event in Visual Studio which will open the resource file and increment the build number automagically. It supports incrementing each of the 4 components of a version number (It's command line driven), for both the file and product versions. Something like this would increment the QFE number by 1 every time a "Build" is performed (QFE is the unused parameter, currently). This would be added as a pre-build event:

"Version Updater.exe" MyResource.rc /FQFE /PQFE

I've used the script a little bit, and it didn't seem to screw anything up. Jon, if you are interested, and if VS6 supports build events, I can send you the script.

[Jon]

There is an answer if Jon wants to try it.

First, there is a 4th unused parameter to a version string.  Jon doesn't use this field, but it could be useful for keeping track of unstable/beta build numbers.

Second, I wrote a script (In AutoIt, of course) that can be called as a pre-build event in Visual Studio which will open the resource file and increment the build number automagically.  It supports incrementing each of the 4 components of a version number (It's command line driven), for both the file and product versions.  Something like this would increment the QFE number by 1 every time a "Build" is performed (QFE is the unused parameter, currently).  This would be added as a pre-build event:

"Version Updater.exe" MyResource.rc /FQFE /PQFE

I've used the script a little bit, and it didn't seem to screw anything up.  Jon, if you are interested, and if VS6 supports build events, I can send you the script.

Sure, as long as it's automagical. It's just the hassle that prevents me from doing it atm

[Chris_1013]

Exactly what I was hoping would be used (the fourth version number field). I guessed it was too much hassle, but if AutoIt can help us keep track of itself, that sounds just groovy.

[Valik]

Sure, as long as it's automagical.  It's just the hassle that prevents me from doing it atm

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Automagical was design goal #1. I emailed it to you, Jon.