Facebook Twitter

View New Content

Javascript Disabled Detected

You currently have javascript disabled. Several functions may not work. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.

autoIT versus autohotkey

Started by brunob , Jul 08 2005 09:05 AM

Please log in to reply

291 replies to this topic

Chris

Administrators
10727 posts

Last active:
Joined: 02 Mar 2004

Don't you think the "Spirit of the GPL" refers to something else other than just complying to its rules.!

It certainly does, which is why the help file prominently credits AutoIt on its main page. This is not required by the GPL, yet has been in place since the first version of AutoHotkey over two years ago. Here is that section:

A special thanks to Jonathan Bennett, whose generosity in releasing AutoIt v2 as free software in 1999 served as an inspiration and time-saver for myself and many others worldwide. In addition, many of AutoHotkey's enhancements to the AutoIt v2 command set, as well as the Window Spy and the script compiler, were adapted directly from the AutoIt v3 source code. So thanks to Jon and the other AutoIt authors for those as well.

Finally, AutoHotkey would not be what it is today without these other individuals.

#106

- Posted 26 February 2006 - 08:18 AM

AHKnow*

Guests

Last active:
Joined: --

I have a different view now on the COM/OLE/ActiveX issue, in the debate of AutoIt versus AutoHotkey. I do not think AutoIt's implementation of COM/OLE/ActiveX is all that vastly superior to AutoHotkey's "quasi" support of COM/OLE/Activex. Furthermore, many people don't realize that AutoHotkey offers a method for you to use VBScript/JScript and thus COM/OLE/ActiveX.

AutoHotkey's FileAppend command allows you to use JScript/VBScript in AutoHotkey scripts. Therefore, you get "quasi" COM/OLE/ActiveX support in AutoHotkey. Obviously, AutoHotkey's approach is more of a "work around", but this "work around" method may be more powerful and useful (via able to support other scripting language). I do however, have issues with AutoHotkey's "quasi" support of COM/OLE/ActiveX via a "round about" method in terms of :

1. Explaining how to use JScript/VBscript in AutoHotkey scripts. Examples would be nice. (Note- Chris has said he would correct this in an update of AutoHotkey)

2. Using syntax like "FileAppend" to support such functionality as oppose to using a more obvious syntax like "OtherScript".

3. I think that "other script" support in AutoHotkey should be expanded. This would provide another method to integrate AutoHotkey's automation and hotkey abilities with other scripting languages like Phython, Perl, .NET scripting languages like ( NScript, Cscript, C# Script, etc...).

4. CMDret (Dll solution to get console output by Corrupt ( http://www.autohotke...opic.php?t=3687 )) should be integrated with AutoHotkey.

Note1- Chris and Corrupt have made plans to do this in a future update of AutoHotkey.

Note2- A related AHK solution to get output from console applications and without using a DLL (works under more simplified situations) was demonstrated by Laszlo ( http://www.autohotke...opic.php?t=5944 )

AutoIt's implementation of COM/OLE/ActiveX is so close to VBScript that it creates a very good argument of why not simply USE VBScript for COM/OLE/ActiveX present itself? An advantage would be IF AutoIt simplified COM/OLE/ActiveX, but arguably AutoIt does NOT and in reality AutoIt has only a "slightly different flavor" of COM/OLE/ActiveX that "fits" better with AutoIt syntax and thinking.

AutoHotkey "round about" method simplifies the issue of using COM/OLE/ActiveX since you don't have to learn a "new flavor" of it and simply use VBScript and JScript, which are both very well documented.

But, if AutoHotkey ever came up with its own simplified COM/OLE/ActiveX support than this might prove very advantageous to script in addition to the many simplified and easy use commands like Loop and for GUI. I'm on the side that simplified and/or easier is often better, if its just as powerful, because you often can write a script FASTER and it can be EASIER to come up with SOLUTIONs.

Anyway, as a result of AutoIt's implementation of COM/OLE/ActiveX being so close to VBScript and AutoHotkey's ability to use commands like FileAppend, CMDret (by Corrupt), and the related AHK solution to get output from console applications ( by Laszlo ) allow you to use VBScript/JScript inside of AutoHotkey scripts makes AutoIt and AutoHotkey a lot more evenly matched than many people think when it comes to COM/OLE/ActiveX. In fact, its often more a matter of preference, as oppose to one scripting language being clearly superior to another.

I mention these points because in many arguments that I have seen about AutoIt versus AutoHotkey, the COM/OLE/ActiveX point is often brought up or many act like this is suppose to be the number 1 factor in which is better. Many people are not aware of what you can do with AutoHotkey in terms of VBScript/JScript and thus COM/OLE/ActiveX.

So if you take away the so-called COM/OLE/ActiveX advantage by AutoIt, than exactly what advantages does AutoIt have? I think many would be surprised that AutoHotkey's advantages in easier to use and understand syntax will start to show themselves more. I think some of the main arguments for using AutoHotkey or AutoIt as oppose to C++, other scripting languages, Visual Basic, etc... is that they are shortcuts and easier ways to solve a problems or give the ability to add automation.

#107

- Posted 27 February 2006 - 04:05 AM

Chris

Administrators
10727 posts

Last active:
Joined: 02 Mar 2004

Thanks for the summary and links. I agree that it would be good to have the easiest method(s) of calling external scripts centrally documented somewhere, and this is planned soon.

It would also be good to have a command that facilitates calling external scripts, but that requires careful consideration to avoid adding a feature that quickly becomes redundant or obsolete. In the meantime, perhaps an #includable function can be listed in the documentation's examples.

#108

- Posted 27 February 2006 - 07:55 AM

AHKnow*

Guests

Last active:
Joined: --

Thanks for the consideration Chris. It's always a joy to interact with a developer that responds and respects his users.

I think that a command to call external scripts would not become obsolete anytime soon, but I do see your point on how such a command could overlap somewhat with other commands. Be that as it may, I believe such a command's usefulness would be really worth it and go a long way to put the COM/OLE/ActiveX issue ( or AutoIt's supposed/alleged primary advantage issue ) to bed.

#109

- Posted 27 February 2006 - 04:00 PM

Guests

Last active:
Joined: --

No Autohotkey is a piece of crap.

well, I would not say it that way, but AHK is for people who don't know how to programm, which is probably the target audience of AHK.

Most other automation tools offer a basic like programming language. Why is AHK failing to do that as well?

#110

- Posted 12 July 2006 - 08:12 AM

PhiLho

Moderators
6850 posts

Last active: Jan 02 2012 10:09 PM
Joined: 27 Dec 2005

Because it was designed to use its own language, that some people (perhaps "non developpers") see as easier to read/write. It is a design choice, you have to live with it, or to leave it (or to rewrite the syntax while using the internals, after all, the code is here to be taken...). So it is not "failing" to do it, it is a choice. One people might regret, but it is its way, and I respect that.

I know how to program, and I chose AutoHotkey anyway, for other reasons (I "live with it"): open source (so I might, someday, make a derivative -- unlikely, but still good to know; plus if I have trouble, I can always take a look and see what is going on); excellent support (from author and enthousiastic users; I don't judge AutoIt' support, never went to its forum); frequent updates from somebody who cares for users and hears them, and is quick to correct bugs (again, no comparison here).

#111

- Posted 12 July 2006 - 08:53 AM

vPhiLho := RegExReplace("Philippe Lhoste", "^(\w{3})\w*\s+\b(\w{3})\w*$", "$1$2")

Thalon

Members
641 posts

Last active: Jan 02 2017 12:17 PM
Joined: 12 Jul 2005

And there are still some users (like some of our Software-Developers and even myself) who really like the syntak

I started learning some other languages (beginning with ASM, KOP, FUP, AWL over C, C++, Python to C#, Java), but I did never find something that really fit my needs (comfort, learning difficulty and possibilties) - except of AHK...

Sometimes I wish I would have a real debugger or the possibility to use ASM directly in AHK-Source, but it wasn't designed for such use... (Anyway I am using it as a Screwdriver for Nails :lol: )

Thalon

#112

- Posted 12 July 2006 - 10:29 AM

AGU

Guests

Last active:
Joined: --

Most other automation tools offer a basic like programming language. Why is AHK failing to do that as well?

Ok, let's assume Chris would decide to change to basic like programming language. Result would be another automation tool that doesn't differ from the others. So it would be useless. Why reinventing the wheel?

As I'm one of these mentioned users that doesn't know how to program, I really like the syntax of Autohotkey. I hope Chris will never change it and realize it is one of Autohotkey's major strengths/unique selling point.

Another thought from myself. I think with the upcoming Windows Powershell under Vista all automation tools that use a basic like syntax are threatend by far more than Autohotkey. But lets see what future brings.

__________________________
Cheers
AGU

#113

- Posted 12 July 2006 - 11:26 AM

majkinetor

Moderators
4512 posts

Last active: May 20 2019 07:41 AM
Joined: 24 May 2006

Syntax of AHK was the bigest problem for me. After 1 month of every day usage I turned to PowerPro to see its syntax and to AutoIt. Since I was working on some big script I didn't have much time to learn new things.

After several months of working with AHK I must admit that I like the syntax more and more every day. I know about 20 programming languages. AHK makes me do things quickly and if I miss advanced features I have working prototype that I can implement in higher programming languages. In the moment of design, it is good to know that IT WORKS! And autohotkey makes me find out that fact easily.

So... after all it is matter of taste and habits...

#114

- Posted 12 July 2006 - 02:32 PM

Guests

Last active:
Joined: --

So... after all it is matter of taste and habits...

well, that's true. However, for a programmer who knows other procedural languages, the syntax of AHK is a real show stopper. Why should he learn a completly new syntax when there are a bunch of other scripting languages who look all similar in some way (Winbatch, AutoIT, VBS, etc.)

So, what is the target audience of AHK? Programmers or non programmers?

#115

- Posted 13 July 2006 - 08:57 AM

Thalon

Members
641 posts

Last active: Jan 02 2017 12:17 PM
Joined: 12 Jul 2005

I think the main targets are non programmers, but I know some "real" programmers using it for the every-day-tasks.

But they still develop bigger programms with C#, Java or something similar...

So, why should a programmer use AutoIt?
AFAIK it does not have a good Hotkey-Support (or Hotstrings), which is the main-difference of AHK in comparison to C# (for example).
So AHK is good for little automations, text-blocks or similar.
AutoIt doesn't have this advantage (AFAIK)
What can be easy done with AutoIt that wouldn't be possible with C#?

Learning of AHK-Syntax is as easy as possible (I do not know any other language that can be learned that fast) because there is much support (AutoCompletion in e.g. PSPad, Intellisense and a greatly structured help).
I do not see anything difficult at it.

Thalon

#116

- Posted 13 July 2006 - 09:38 AM

AGU

Guests

Last active:
Joined: --

@guest

btw. you can specify a username. You mustn't register for this. Simply enter a nice name in the appropiate field when posting. This makes it easier to address you in a posting.

Concerning the other points, I share Thalons opinion. Main targets are non-programmers I think. It's because of the easy readable syntax e.g. IfNotEqual, IfInString, ...
This has advantages as well as disadvantages.
______________________
Cheers
AGU

#117

- Posted 13 July 2006 - 10:07 AM

BoBo

Guests

Last active:
Joined: --

The Anonymous Guest (AKA troll) wrote:

So, what is the target audience of AHK? Programmers or non programmers?

What's better a knife or a spon? Depends on what you wanna eat.
Is it up to you to decide what you use? Yes.
Would you choose a spon to eat a steak, because soup lovers are not happy about the way a knife works with soup? Hopefully not.
Once you decide to have a soup instead, would you stay with the knife because it worked so sophisticated with the steak? :roll:
If somebody tells you that there are similar knifes on the market, isn't it still all about what you wanna eat ? Indeed.

So, what is the target audience if you want to eat a steak? Soup lovers or carnivores? TBH. Who cares - as long as you got a knife!

Thx for listening. 8)

#118

- Posted 13 July 2006 - 10:26 AM

Troll BoBo

Guests

Last active:
Joined: --

The Anonymous Guest (AKA troll) wrote:
...
So, what is the target audience if you want to eat a steak? Soup lovers or carnivores? TBH. Who cares - as long as you got a knife!

well, troll PoPo I don't know what you are talking about, but we are talking about programming languages. Maybe the sun melted the last bit of your mind .... at least that's a reasonable explanation for your lecture about soup and steaks. But maybe you are just a fat dumpass who thinks about food all the time... So, just shut up and leave us alone.

#119