Modify

Opened 10 years ago

Closed 10 years ago

Last modified 10 years ago

#842 closed Feature Request (Rejected)

Adding Lua as an alternative syntax

Reported by: anonymous Owned by:
Milestone: Component: AutoIt
Version: Severity: None
Keywords: lua syntax Cc:

Description

Adding Lua as an alternative syntax or converting AutoIt features into a Lua API, whichever the techtical term here would be. This is probably an out-of-question suggestion due to fact it'd only benefit few. Even so, please refrain from being arrogant and try to give a smart answer to a (probably) stupid suggestion.

I've heard that Lua scripting engine is pretty easy to add to a software. Out of pure interest, I'd like to hear what are the possible cons and difficulties here, how much work would this take and any other thoughts you have.

Attachments (0)

Change History (3)

comment:1 in reply to: ↑ description Changed 10 years ago by Valik

  • Resolution set to Rejected
  • Status changed from new to closed

Replying to anonymous:

Adding Lua as an alternative syntax or converting AutoIt features into a Lua API, whichever the techtical term here would be. This is probably an out-of-question suggestion due to fact it'd only benefit few. Even so, please refrain from being arrogant and try to give a smart answer to a (probably) stupid suggestion.

Why? Why shouldn't you get a smart answer to a request you obviously put absolutely no thought into? To say this is a stupid suggestion is grossly underestimating just how stupid it really is.

I've heard that Lua scripting engine is pretty easy to add to a software. Out of pure interest, I'd like to hear what are the possible cons and difficulties here, how much work would this take and any other thoughts you have.

In case you didn't notice, AutoIt is a language. So why would we go out of our way to embed another language to our language? It makes no sense. If Lua is so much better that you prefer it to AutoIt... use Lua. We won't be hurt, really.

comment:2 follow-up: Changed 10 years ago by anonymous

I had a hunch I was going to get answer like this. Just bitter channeling of what seems to be rage or frustration. Spooky... As smart and superior as you might feel after those zings of yours, you still fail to give answer to a very simple hypothetic question. Now this might've been the wrong place to write about a feature that I knew would probably never be added, but... You have to admit this: The mature thing for you to do would've been to either duly answer the question or, if you didn't know the answer straight away, calmly point out that you're not familiar enough to subject in hand to give an answer without wasting time investigating it. Decending to level of personal insults hardly helps anyone, it's merely a waste of time.

As for my question/"suggestion", please do forget it. Like I pointed out, I asked it out of pure interest, in pursuit for information. Maybe I didn't quite think trough in which section of autoitscript.com to place this question thus giving the impression I'm acctually wanting something more than information. But I have to say, you gave the impression of either despiting the less tech-savvy and thinking you're above them or being really offended by my post. If it's the latter, I'd like to appologize.

comment:3 in reply to: ↑ 2 Changed 10 years ago by Valik

Replying to anonymous:

I had a hunch I was going to get answer like this. Just bitter channeling of what seems to be rage or frustration. Spooky...

Yes. Because you are an expert on me. You're such an astounding psych analyst that you can analyze someone you have never met, someone you know nothing about, all based on one post. Bravo. I assume the next generation of psycho analysts in training are currently familiarizing themselves with your volume of works in their studies?

As smart and superior as you might feel after those zings of yours, you still fail to give answer to a very simple hypothetic question.

Maybe I don't give an answer because I don't think you're capable of understanding it? The answer is so searingly obvious to me that your inability to see it on your own coupled with all the lack of thought you've demonstrated so far haven't really led me to believe you can comprehend the answer.

Further, you haven't asked a question (no question mark). What you do seem to want to know is unclear. Are you asking how to extend Lua with support for AutoIt functionality? Are you asking to extend AutoIt with embedded Lua? Finally, are you asking for Lua-like syntax in AutoIt? Your post mentions all three which does not seem to be the intent. Note, however, that I do not care and will not answer no matter what "question" you are asking. This is the wrong place to ask.

Now this might've been the wrong place to write about a feature that I knew would probably never be added, but... You have to admit this: The mature thing for you to do would've been to either duly answer the question or, if you didn't know the answer straight away, calmly point out that you're not familiar enough to subject in hand to give an answer without wasting time investigating it. Decending to level of personal insults hardly helps anyone, it's merely a waste of time.

So you wish to talk about maturity and descent to the level of personal insults while in the previous breath you were analyzing me and determining why I'm being a prick to you? There's a word for that: hypocrisy. I'm being a prick because you won't/can't do critical thinking on your own so you ask others to do it for you. You also want to talk about wasting time but you posted a feature request you knew would never be implemented on our issue tracker. It's good to see people are reading WikiStart.

Accusing me of wasting time, indeed.

As for my question/"suggestion", please do forget it. Like I pointed out, I asked it out of pure interest, in pursuit for information. Maybe I didn't quite think trough in which section of autoitscript.com to place this question thus giving the impression I'm acctually wanting something more than information. But I have to say, you gave the impression of either despiting the less tech-savvy and thinking you're above them or being really offended by my post. If it's the latter, I'd like to appologize.

Then I am giving off the correct impression - sort of. Think of it more as indifference with temporary disdain. I am indifferent to people that aren't tech-savvy but try to pretend they are. I am indifferent to people who can't apply critical thinking skills to think about something before they open their word-hole and let stupidity tumble forth. I learned a long time ago to stop and think and pay attention to what I'm doing. Anybody not thinking at a basic, rational level is beneath those who are.

As for forgetting this? I already had the moment I navigated away from this page - until you posted again. It's hard to forget about something that won't go away, though.

Guidelines for posting comments:

  • You cannot re-open a ticket but you may still leave a comment if you have additional information to add.
  • In-depth discussions should take place on the forum.

For more information see the full version of the ticket guidelines here.

Add Comment

Modify Ticket

Action
as closed The ticket will remain with no owner.
Author


E-mail address and user name can be saved in the Preferences.

 
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.