Timeline
Apr 20, 2015:
- 6:33 PM Ticket #3012 (GUISetFont - no default value for parameter: attribute) updated by
- There is no value for the default, I would assume in this case the default value would be zero, meaning no attribute set. There's no constant to put in that parameter in the GUIConstantsEX.au3 file. We'd have to use a made up constant name if zero wasn't sufficient for there, which sort of goes against using the defined variables that the Windows API uses. But that decision is above my paygrade, and I'd just use the Default keyword, or zero.
Apr 18, 2015:
- 10:17 PM Ticket #3002 (Bug - _DateAdd('s', 1, '1970/01/01') Returns '1970/01/01') updated by
- After deliberation, I have to agree with your opinion, and also to ask you to consider, adding an appropriate description for the Help documentation, because this was not clear for me so can be not clear for others, especialy non native english coders.
- 7:43 PM Ticket #3013 (Forum Intelligent Seach) closed by
- Rejected: The Search comes with the forum software we use so changes need to be requested there. .. or simply use Google. Jos
- 7:42 PM Ticket #3014 (Intelligent Forum Search) closed by
- Duplicate
- 12:02 PM Ticket #3002 (Bug - _DateAdd('s', 1, '1970/01/01') Returns '1970/01/01') closed by
- No Bug: I am going to close this. It seems illogical to me that the function should deal with adding/subtracting an interval smaller than the lowest interval defined in the DTG passed to it. If the user wants to add/subtract a time interval they need to define the start time, not expect the function to default to some arbitrary value. M23
- 1:00 AM Ticket #3014 (Intelligent Forum Search) updated by
-
Version changed
Automatic ticket cleanup. - 12:11 AM Ticket #3014 (Intelligent Forum Search) created by
- I'd like to see a Forum Intelligent Search option in addition to …
- 12:00 AM Ticket #3013 (Forum Intelligent Seach) updated by
-
Version changed
Automatic ticket cleanup.
Apr 17, 2015:
- 11:56 PM Ticket #3013 (Forum Intelligent Seach) created by
- Id like to see a Forum Intelligent Search option in addition to …
- 8:28 AM Ticket #3012 (GUISetFont - no default value for parameter: attribute) updated by
- I forgot to add some additional request: Please consider making appropriate changes.
Apr 14, 2015:
- 10:42 PM Ticket #3012 (GUISetFont - no default value for parameter: attribute) created by
- In HelpFile documentation there is lack of information about the …
Apr 13, 2015:
- 8:06 AM Ticket #3011 (_FileListToArrayRec does not closes file handle) closed by
- Fixed: Fixed by revision [11269] in version: 3.3.13.21
- 8:05 AM Ticket #3011 (_FileListToArrayRec does not closes file handle) updated by
- I have discovered why there is a difference between 3.3.12.0 and 3.3.13.20 - in the latter only asking to exclude symbolic links from the UDF return uses the DLL call, excluding hidden and system files is done using the native FileFindFirstFile function. When I change the function parameters to exclude links I get the same results as you. Thanks for the report I will amend the UDF accordingly. M23
Apr 10, 2015:
- 4:19 AM Ticket #3011 (_FileListToArrayRec does not closes file handle) updated by
- Yes, 3.3.13.20 returns 0, but the UDF should be changed, FindFirstFileW handle never closed. […] should be […]
Apr 6, 2015:
- 4:34 PM Ticket #3011 (_FileListToArrayRec does not closes file handle) updated by
- When running that reproducer script with 3.3.12.0, the second MsgBox indeed displays "1, 1" - running with 3.3.13.20 it displays "0, 0". Can you confirm? M23
Apr 5, 2015:
- 9:40 AM Ticket #3011 (_FileListToArrayRec does not closes file handle) created by
- After we read files in subfolders, the folder handle is not closed, …
Apr 2, 2015:
- 5:37 PM Ticket #3010 (Au3Info - Double Click on Listview in "Control" Tab) created by
- When I 2*click on "Advanced Mode" then I get "[CLASS:Button; …
Apr 1, 2015:
- 10:48 AM Ticket #3009 (MouseGetCursor for HAND) created by
- Running GUISetCursor examle and after run MouseGetCursor example does …
Mar 30, 2015:
- 6:23 PM Ticket #3008 (texting on a notepad) closed by
- Rejected: This is a site for feature requests or Bug reports, not support requests. Please visit our forum for support. Jos
- 12:00 PM Ticket #3008 (texting on a notepad) updated by
-
Version changed
Automatic ticket cleanup. - 11:11 AM Ticket #3008 (texting on a notepad) created by
- I am able to enter text in a notepad and save it. But what 1.if i …
Mar 28, 2015:
- 10:16 PM Ticket #3003 (Using a function call in an array assignment causes 2 function calls) updated by
- @BrewManNH : you pointed exatly what I was trying to do to assist a forum user in this thread : http://www.autoitscript.com/forum/topic/169135-flexibility-with-declaring-an-array/ I wanted to post this kind of code : […] But when I saw the result, I decided to write a ticket here. For me, it is a bug, but you decid :-) If not, maybe something about this "bad" uasge should appear in the help file
- 8:22 PM Ticket #3003 (Using a function call in an array assignment causes 2 function calls) updated by
- You're calling the function to get the returned value for the array assignment, then you're calling it again when you actually set the value to the array. Run this modification to your code to see what's happening. […] It calls the function the first time to see what element of the array to set it to, then when AutoIt does the actual declaration for the element it calls it again to see where it's going. You'll notice that the only element with anything in it is $aArray[1] because that's what the return value is when you set the string to the array. So, I don't know if this is a bug, but it looks like a bad idea to use a function call to determine where in an array to put something, at least don't do it in the actual declaration statement, because you won't be able to be 100% sure it's going where you think it's going.
Mar 26, 2015:
- 10:19 PM Ticket #3003 (Using a function call in an array assignment causes 2 function calls) updated by
- I don't really understand what you mean in comment3…
- 5:15 PM Ticket #3003 (Using a function call in an array assignment causes 2 function calls) updated by
- Replying to Melba23: > Interesting that it does not do the same when you set the function to a variable Not very interesting. You assign the return value of the function to a variable and then evaluate that variable expression (twice).
- 4:44 PM Ticket #3003 (Using a function call in an array assignment causes 2 function calls) updated by
- Interesting that it does not do the same when you set the function to a variable: […] M23
- 3:42 PM Ticket #3007 (Make {} the empty map.) created by
- […]
- 3:41 PM Ticket #3006 (Create a shortcut for the expression in a With statement.) created by
- […]
- 3:39 PM Ticket #3005 (Allow maps as expressions in a "With" statement.) created by
- […]
- 12:29 PM Ticket #3004 (Anonymous Maps) updated by
- OK, it occurred to me just now. Should I create three separate trac tickets for these proposals? I still think these three proposals do not cover my original feature request though. I was hoping to set up an anonymous map using With and then refer to the map accordingly. However, the syntax for the empty map did always seem somewhat wrong though. […] Is this a better syntax?
Mar 25, 2015:
- 11:08 PM Ticket #3004 (Anonymous Maps) updated by
- OK, everything is clear now. Thank you clearing that up. Now that I've reread your posts with my refreshed perspective, I agree with all points.
- 10:45 PM Ticket #3004 (Anonymous Maps) updated by
-
Replying to jaberwacky:
> I'm not exactly sure what you're saying with proposal 2 and 3.
I'm saying that you're proposing three different things and that they should be considered separately.
> Are you saying the idea is good but that the execution is bad?
I think there were some problems and suggested possible refinements. Personally I support all three proposals.
Replying to anonymous:
> How does this make the language inconsistent? This only applies to maps and not arrays and not objects. Dot access does not imply object object orientation. I'm actually not trying to subtly sneak anything OO related into the language.
I didn't even think about objects, they're a lost cause. I think that it's a bad idea to use one syntax for two different things: array and map creation.
I don't like the current way to create a map:
Local $map[]I'd preferLocal $map = {}orLocal $map = Map ()orLocal $map = NewMap ()orLocal $map = @EmptyMapbecause they make it clear what is happening. But[]does not. Why shouldLocal $array = [](array initialization) andLocal $map = ([])(empty map expression) create different things? - 4:51 PM Ticket #3004 (Anonymous Maps) updated by
- Rewind... How does this make the language inconsistent? This only applies to maps and not arrays and not objects. Dot access does not imply object object orientation. I'm actually not trying to subtly sneak anything OO related into the language.
- 4:22 PM Ticket #3004 (Anonymous Maps) updated by
-
Replying to anonymous:
> It makes AutoIt inconsistent and is not open for extensions.
> Why not
@EmptyMap? I'm not exactly sure what you're saying with proposal 2 and 3. Are you saying the idea is good but that the execution is bad?@EmptyMapWorks for me. - 1:22 PM Ticket #2831 (Function Binding) updated by
- Replying to jchd18: This was closed because of a misunderstanding, please reopen.
- 1:13 PM Ticket #3004 (Anonymous Maps) updated by
-
Replying to jaberwacky:
> As far as I know AutoIt isn't trying to mimic or make it easy for JS, PHP, etc programmers. I'm sure all languages have their syntax differences that all people new to the language would have to learn. If someone coming to AutoIt from another language tries to use AutoIt the same way they used their previous language, that is an operator error.
It makes AutoIt inconsistent and is not open for extensions.
Why not
@EmptyMap? - 5:21 AM Ticket #3004 (Anonymous Maps) updated by
- Sorry for the double post.
- 5:20 AM Ticket #3004 (Anonymous Maps) updated by
- As far as I know AutoIt isn't trying to mimic or make it easy for JS, PHP, etc programmers. I'm sure all languages have their syntax differences that all people new to the language would have to learn. If someone coming to AutoIt from another language tries to use AutoIt the same way they used their previous language, that is an operator error.
- 5:19 AM Ticket #3004 (Anonymous Maps) updated by
- As far as I know AutoIt isn't trying to mimic or make it easy for JS, PHP, etc programmers. I'm sure all languages have their syntax differences that all people new to the language would have to learn. If someone coming to AutoIt from another language tries to use AutoIt the same way they used their previous language, that is an operator error.
- 12:41 AM Ticket #3004 (Anonymous Maps) updated by
-
This actually contains three proposals:
1. Allow maps as expressions in a "With" statement.
Example:
[…]
Maps and "Object-type variables" have the same syntax. That extension is only natural.
2. Create a shortcut for the expression in a
Withstatement. Example: […] What about..element? Saves at most one line, not intuitive, easy to miss, will confuse programmers and tools, strange semantics, might encourage overuse – probably a bad idea, but absolutely possible.[]is a bad idea, see point 3..[]is really strange, probably hard to implement and makes you assume that$objectis a map, althrough it may be an "Object-type variable". Maybe with an additional keyword or constant (@WithExpression). 3. Make[]the empty map. Example: […] Note that the parentheses in the third-last line are a necessary syntactic disambiguation. Without them, it would be a broken array initialization (see #2845), or ambiguous. The same is true for 2d array initializations. Again, this may save at most one line. It will confuse any programmer coming from any language where that is an expression for an empty array (JS, PHP, ...): they will use it thinking that it is an empty array, and will be legitimately surprised when their program breaks. Definitely a bad idea. Maybe with braces ({})?
Mar 24, 2015:
- 10:12 PM Ticket #3004 (Anonymous Maps) created by
- So I have an idea which I think will make coding a little easier in …
- 12:38 PM Ticket #3003 (Using a function call in an array assignment causes 2 function calls) updated by
- Also, this code is a good example of what happends : […]
Mar 23, 2015:
- 10:58 PM Ticket #3003 (Using a function call in an array assignment causes 2 function calls) created by
- With this code : […] "myFunction" appears two times in the output …
Mar 22, 2015:
- 5:22 PM Ticket #2988 (_Excel_RangeFind fails without throwing error when searching inactive ...) updated by
- Fixed by revision [11253] in version: 3.3.13.21
- 5:21 PM Ticket #2988 (_Excel_RangeFind fails without throwing error when searching inactive ...) closed by
- Fixed: Fixed by revision [11252] in version: 3.3.13.21
- 5:07 PM Ticket #2993 (_Excel_RangeFind returns only last occurrence of string found Rather ...) closed by
- Fixed: Fixed by revision [11251] in version: 3.3.13.21
- 11:52 AM Ticket #3002 (Bug - _DateAdd('s', 1, '1970/01/01') Returns '1970/01/01') updated by
- Oops, I never read the help file down to the last Remark line. BTW, this important remark about allowable date formats would be better placed in the $Date parameter description: "Input date in the format YYYY/MM/DD[ HH:MM:SS]" --> "Input date in any format described in _DateTimeSplit()". Sorry for the noise, but yes I still find it would be natural to expect the function to return dates under the same format used for input.
- 2:23 AM Ticket #3002 (Bug - _DateAdd('s', 1, '1970/01/01') Returns '1970/01/01') updated by
- jchd, It does accept - (see the StringSplit() in _DateTimeSplit() […] Unless you meant the output should be 2015-03-21 00:00:01 and not 2015/03/21 00:00:00
- 2:15 AM Ticket #2983 (_WinApi_GetString documentation error) closed by
- Fixed
Mar 21, 2015:
- 10:38 AM Milestone 3.3.13.20 completed
- 4:35 AM Ticket #3002 (Bug - _DateAdd('s', 1, '1970/01/01') Returns '1970/01/01') updated by
- I'm not sure this qualifies as 'bug' and I'd rather see this as a feature request, for when you supply a date only (without time), that doesn't always imply that you mean time = '00:00:00'. Yet commonly used library functions work the way to want and consider a default time part to be '00:00:00'. BTW if ever this is accepted, I'd like other would also consider another modification. Currently the function only works when the date separator is a slash (/), but the standard separator specified by ISO 8601 is a dash (-). It would be pretty beneficial to simply mask off the separator in the regexp, yet take care to use the same separator in output. […] The same change should be made to related _Date* functions, like _DateDiff and some others. The best witness that this change is indeed needed is that _DateIsValid accepts both separators! Note: I don't advocate to accept any more format variant described in ISO 8601.
Note:
See TracTimeline
for information about the timeline view.
