Auto it 3.2.10.0 and 3.2.11.0 on same comp

[Mixam]

I was doing that auot it 1-2-3 class thing by valuater. I had previously installed Auto It 3.2.10.0 and had done some scripts in it. The 123 needs beta 3.2.11.0 for some if its stuff so i dled that and the newest SciTE and off I went. Then I realized that some the the scripts i had be running from the .au3 files no longer worked, so I used the .exe's I had compiled with 3.2.10.0 and they worked ok.

But now I want to make some changes to my scripts and I can't compile them because when I do with the beta 3.2.11.0 they don't work properly. I found in the start menu how to pick which definitions SciTE will use and switched them. But when i right clicked on them and went to compile with options i had two choices, Production 3.2.11.1 and beta 3.2.11.0 now I'm pretty sure I never dled 3.2.11.1 and don't think it even exists...

Anyways I decided to uninstall 3.2.10.0 and 3.2.11.0 and SciTE and try again from scratch. I dled 3.2.10.0 first and installed it and went to SciTE and it appeared to be running 3.2.10.0 since when i created scripts that was the version it showed up in the comment However some of the features I had come to use like the gui editors were not in there so I dled SciTE off the download page and then they were back.

However now when i right click and do compile with options there are two options Production 3.2.11.1 and beta 0.0.0.0 So what I'm wondering is that a type on the SciTE and using 3.2.11.1 would actually compile with 3.2.10.0 or did 3.2.11.1 come bundled with SciTE ?? I'm very confused. If I compile the scripts with the option 3.2.11.1 will they work? Is there even a 3.2.11.1? Is there a way I can get 3.2.10.0 to show up as an option in the "compile using options" screen?

Can I download the beta 3.2.11.0 again and will I still be able to compile with 3.2.10.0 ? Would I be able to switch between them by selecting the "switch definitions" in the SciTE folder in the startup menu?

I'm hoping that it showing up as 3.2.11.1 is just a glitch in SciTE and that it is actually using 3.2.10.0 Sorry if i posted this in the wrong place, but I don't think its an actual error with the beta, but more a SciTE problem so I posted in general.

Edit: I just tried compiling my 3.2.10.0 script with just 3.2.10.0 and SciTE installed and it didn't work. I got an error halfway through the compile. So I uninstalled everything and reinstalled just 3.2.10.0 and now it compiles good. I would however like to be able to use the new SciTE tools and be able to do the autoit 1-2-3 class so can somebody please help me

Edited February 26, 2008 by Mixam

[evilertoaster]

I didn't think autoit123 requires the beta...might wanan doubble check that. It might be eaiser just to only install the latest production version of autoit (3.2.10.0) and the scite editor to go with it and don't worry about the beta for now...

If you only have 3.2.10.0 installed and the cite tools what error happpens when you try to use autoit 123?

[herewasplato]

I didn't think autoit123 requires the beta...might wanan doubble check that...

If you attempt to run one of the demos, you get the error shown in the attached file.

@Mixam,

Uninstall the beta version of AutoIt

then start AutoIt 1-2-3

select "Next" to get to the second page

(the page shown in the screen shot attached to this post)

Click on "Show Me Help Demos"

Select one of the demos

Click on the "Run Demo" button

Edit1: Select Cancel to the error MsgBox that asks if you want to download beta

A box should pop up asking you for the directory that the beta is installed in...

...point that box to the standard AutoIt installation

You should be able to continue the class.

It would still be nice if you would help us by posting code that worked in 3.2.10.0 but not in 3.2.11.0 or in 3.2.11.1

@Valuater,

Correct me if that is not a sane work around.

Edit2: Sometimes the forum does not load the preview of the screen shot. Clicking inside where the screen shot preview should show does open the pop up image - at least for me.

Edited February 27, 2008 by herewasplato

[Mixam]

The problem seemed to be with singleton specifically:

If _Singleton("\" & $thisprogram, 1) = 0 Then

MsgBox(4096, "Warning", "An occurence of " & $thisprogram & " is already running")

Every time it popped up the msgbox saying the program was already running. I didn't edit it out and try again and it was like the first line in the script, so I'm not sure if there were any other errors. Not sure if my code is the problem or not the example of singleton in the helpfile had "test\test" or some such. I did run with the 3.2.10.0 though so...

I will try what you said for the 1-2-3 and see how it goes. Is there anyway I can use the newer SciTE with the 3.2.10.0 version of autoit? Otherwise i can't finish up the gui editor stuff

I'm thining it is using 3.2.10.0 but just says 3.2.11.1 unless 3.2.11.1 comes with that version of SciTE I got linked to from in 1-2-3

[herewasplato]

The problem seemed to be with singleton specifically:

_Singleton changed.

v3.2.10.0

$sOccurenceName String to identify the occurrence of the script

$iFlag Action if @error

0 - Exit if occurrence already exists

1 - Return if occurrence already exists

v3.2.11.0

$sOccurenceName String to identify the occurrence of the script. This string may not contain any \ characters unless you are placing the object in a namespace.

$iFlag Action if @error

0 - Exit if occurrence already exists

1 - Return if occurrence already exists

2 - Allow the object to be accessed by anybody in the system. This is useful if specifying a "Global\" object in a multi-user environment.

Change your existing scripts accordingly and then you can have/run production & beta.

[Mixam]

Sorry for the late reply, I was snowboarding in the mountains

So if i change it from If _Singleton("\" & $thisprogram, 1) = 0 Then

to this If _Singleton($thisprogram, 1) = 0 Then

it should work in the production and the beta?

[herewasplato]

...it should work in the production and the beta?

Yes, I think that it should work for you...

...but there is one way to find out - try it. :-)

Unlike snowboarding, it doesn't hurt to try.