Jump to content

Sky Slate Blueberry Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate
Photo

My status and website changes


  • Please log in to reply
101 replies to this topic
derRaphael
  • Members
  • 872 posts
  • Last active: Mar 19 2013 04:42 PM
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2007
1st of all...thx chris, ahk wont be the same without you.And now to my 2 cent:Well, i am sort of ambivalent with this turn of ahk development. It's a good thing to see it evolving, OTH if AHK_L turns out to be a open sourced community project - with a biiiig thanx to big "L" for its start - it may be wise to change organizing to a somewhat more transparent form.
i miss something for AHK_L like milestones, feature freezes (aka stable version) and such stuff. i think especially for all those who use ahk in a production environment and think to switch to ahk_l in a production environment should have a chance to work with a version which is clearly marked as rock solid stable, just as good ol' ahk was, not as one unmarked completly which evolves into a feature jungle with an unknown direction.

it's good to see that AHK will be continued, but what about the noDecompile flag? AFAIK this got never released is it now gone? also i'd love to see anynomous functions (lamda and closure style) before dealing with objects. also when dealing with objects what about some clean class definitions? atm some of these features are build in, probably others, too but somehow information should be at least available at a prominent place (and no i dont mean the dozents of counting pages AHK_L thread, nor - alltho good organized- lexikos private repository on ahk.net)

probably the topic fundraising should be announced again and more agressively to have a base which may ensure server and bandwidth availability for a time when chris decides to completely turn away from ahk's community - which hopefully will never happen.

IMHO instead of naming the ahk version of chris to "Basic AHK" or "AHK Classic" i'd love to see that its called ahkc to reflect the effort which has been put into this language by its former maintainer Chris and to pay tribute and respect to his work.
[/list]
greets
dR

All scripts, unless otherwise noted, are hereby released under CC-BY

tank
  • Administrators
  • 4345 posts
  • AutoHotkey Foundation
  • Last active: Oct 13 2016 01:04 AM
  • Joined: 21 Dec 2007
+1 on the issues with stable releases milestones etc for thos of us in production environs

-1 ahkc
if a new extension were to come about it should be with the new versions not the old version. Or maybe you dont mean file extension just its nick name. what about tribute to autoit to then?
Never lose.
WIN or LEARN.

derRaphael
  • Members
  • 872 posts
  • Last active: Mar 19 2013 04:42 PM
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2007

+1 on the issues with stable releases milestones etc for thos of us in production environs

thx

-1 ahkc
if a new extension were to come about it should be with the new versions not the old version. Or maybe you dont mean file extension just its nick name. what about tribute to autoit to then?

actually i was referring to its name (not the file extension). so when people speak of good ol' days they may refer to ahkc instead of "Basic AHK" or "AHK Classic" both forms do not reflect the effort that has been made and the work which came with it. "basic ahk" sounds like a stripped down or othewise crippled version and "ahk classic" like its been out of date for ages and now resurrects for some marketing reasons (reminds me of PS one)

All scripts, unless otherwise noted, are hereby released under CC-BY

tank
  • Administrators
  • 4345 posts
  • AutoHotkey Foundation
  • Last active: Oct 13 2016 01:04 AM
  • Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Ah i see then perhaps naming AHKL something different would be more to the point
Leave the name as is for the sake of brand recognition but change AHKL to something like AHK 64 to reflect its support for the 64 bit OSa dn leave current AHK as is to keep it separate and protect it as a brand

-- obviously this is just my 2 cents I am no marketing expert --

I just know that when old products change names they dissapear often
Never lose.
WIN or LEARN.

SKAN
  • Administrators
  • 9115 posts
  • Last active:
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2005

its been out of date for ages


It has.

None
  • Members
  • 3199 posts
  • Last active: Nov 05 2015 09:55 PM
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2009
"Vanilla AHK" has been used on the forum several times recently do you like that better?

derRaphael
  • Members
  • 872 posts
  • Last active: Mar 19 2013 04:42 PM
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2007

its been out of date for ages


It has.


ages like decades ... remember the time that circuitgirl brought her joystick/c64 emulator to the market? at that time the c64 was out of date for ages. this sort of ages i mean.

"Vanilla AHK" has been used on the forum several times recently do you like that better?


actually a vanilla software (like the vanilla kernel sources) is still under active development. which is not the case here. in our case the new branch "*_L" is under active development and the master branch is stalled and wont be continued. face it: sooner or later ahkc will be only kept for historical reasons but not for effective usage. so if ahk_l is the true successor of ahkc it should be named ahk, too and the origins should be renamed to avoid confusion. better now for continuity than later.

All scripts, unless otherwise noted, are hereby released under CC-BY

jaco0646
  • Moderators
  • 3165 posts
  • Last active: Apr 01 2014 01:46 AM
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2006

"Vanilla AHK" has been used on the forum several times recently do you like that better?

No. AHK's primary audience will not recognize the word vanilla as a computer science term, thus it is meaningless. The word basic conveys unambiguously a lack of advanced features.

majkinetor
  • Moderators
  • 4512 posts
  • Last active: Jul 29 2016 12:40 AM
  • Joined: 24 May 2006

not as one unmarked completly which evolves into a feature jungle with an unknown direction.

AHKL certainly doesn't evolve into that direction. Every modification was given a lot of thought as far as I am aware of.
Posted Image

Zaelia
  • Members
  • 754 posts
  • Last active: Jan 17 2015 02:38 AM
  • Joined: 31 Oct 2008
In the past, how we were doing? Why changes ?
AHK and AHKL

<!-- m -->http://www.autohotkey.com/download/<!-- m -->
Chris named itself his version AHKB, and not AHKC or AHK :(

my opinion:
if AHKB, then AHKC
if AHK, then AHK
it depends on how Chris wants to call its version, and how Lexikos or not to rename his own, a version number can be equally well

derRaphael
  • Members
  • 872 posts
  • Last active: Mar 19 2013 04:42 PM
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2007

This is the original AutoHotkey, suitable for those who don't need Unicode, objects/arrays, and other new features.


Somehow this lil sentence makes me sad.

All scripts, unless otherwise noted, are hereby released under CC-BY

sbc
  • Members
  • 321 posts
  • Last active: Jun 07 2011 10:24 AM
  • Joined: 25 Aug 2009

naming AHKL something different would be more to the point


What about, Autohotkey++ ? :roll:

tank
  • Administrators
  • 4345 posts
  • AutoHotkey Foundation
  • Last active: Oct 13 2016 01:04 AM
  • Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Oh I kinda like that too
Never lose.
WIN or LEARN.

Michael@Oz
  • Members
  • 234 posts
  • Last active: Dec 30 2011 11:24 PM
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2009
I've been away and everything falls apart?

My original motivation for starting the AutoHotkey project was to empower users, including non-programmers, to do automation and hotkeys. I wanted the scripting language to be kept simple yet flexible.
Thanks to everyone who's given their support and encouragement over the years!

Chris, I think you acheived your original goals, it is still simple and flexible. Thank you for your support.

Lexikos
  • Administrators
  • 9844 posts
  • AutoHotkey Foundation
  • Last active:
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2006

it's good to see that AHK will be continued, but what about the noDecompile flag? AFAIK this got never released is it now gone?

NoDecompile adds an extra level of encryption over the script source which would be almost entirely ineffective if its details were released. I suppose that using a non-standard executable packer is more effective.

somehow information should be at least available at a prominent place

Such as? There's already a lot of detail in the help file, which is included with every install. My online documentation is linked from the official documentation page. The only problem I see is the lack of a search function in my online documentation, but Google partly makes up for that. For example: site:autohotkey.net/~Lexikos minindex. (I often use this method for MSDN and the official AHK documentation.)

What about, Autohotkey++

Never. :)