CREATE Folder for Inexistent Locations

[SkyFrontier]

zer0:

Learn the difference!

Me:

Code: Select all

...this is not my department! It's DON's!

This = wording and semantics inside the program.

[SkyFrontier]

Situations I'd like to have being covered for this feature:
-scripts that assume an existent hard-coded location (several scripts don't work just because the lack of this, and this is clear after testing a few bunch which meet such condition); locations could be created on the fly, popping-up a dialog that could ask the user whether to do: create or ignore - or not!, having a switch to auto-create when a folder is not found; to meet the two-fool rule, zer0 agreed in the occasion of the topic proposition;
-unavailable locations (previously discussed in this very topic): double-clicking them could pop a message asking on what to do > create or go to the first AVAILABLE upper directory, not anything else randomly;
-pasting non-existent locations at the address bar: same stuff, "it doesn't exist: create?" (instead of the current "not found!/cancel" dialog).

The weird thing is: when you try to reach a folder that was deleted but it is still available via Recent Locations/Address Bar history, XY DOES pop the gentle and useful dialog politely offering to create such directory again!
This is all about automation and time saving, and that's why I'm insisting on this.
Many thanks!

[zer0]

If a script is hard-coded to assume that a location is available then you can use echo exists() to check if a directory does exist. If that function returns 0 (zero), then it does not so you can create a new dir on the fly by calling new with appropriate parameters. Thus, how does your wish differ from the functionality offered above?

[SkyFrontier]

zer0:

If a script is hard-coded to assume that a location is available then you can use echo exists() to check if a directory does exist. If that function returns 0 (zero), then it does not so you can create a new dir on the fly by calling new with appropriate parameters.

Great. When we have Time Machine as an XY functionality, I'll be glad to get back to 19/Feb-'10, 16:05 and tell your solution to yourself. Next, I'll meet myself retired in the future and ask myself to help me on trivial tasks, just to not bother anyone anymore with such dumb projects. Community? Pankow will define better my sense of community then.

Thus, how does your wish differ from the functionality offered above?

Besides not being a script master who don't write scripts on demand? Nothing at all, except for that one... no!, TWO other occasions not covered for your answer!

Meanwhile, the official version...

[zer0]

Thus, how does your wish differ from the functionality offered above?

Besides not being a script master who don't write scripts on demand?

If it's a scripting scenario then it should be handled via scripting.

In others, how would one double-click on an unavailable location? As for going to such a location via AB, a lot would depend on what is your aim when going such an action.

[SkyFrontier]

zer0:

If it's a scripting scenario then it should be handled via scripting.

The point is: why make it harder when it could be simpler?!

In others, how would one double-click on an unavailable location?

The same way we currently do but being beamed several levels upper, instead of just being gently conduced to the first available parent folder.

[TheQwerty]

Can you clearly explain what you are going on about?

[SkyFrontier]

@TheQwerty:
I'd like XYplorer to automatically create folders in situations like
-scripts that have hard-coded locations - one build a script for himself and does not bother in using the echo exists() solution remembered by zer0. So he has such folder available for him, but other users just got a broken script because they don't have such folder on their systems, and will never have a clue on what's going on.

-unavailable locations: quite often I save a set of tabs on a machine and for a reason or another I delete its counterpart on another. XY could tell me whether to create or ignore the currently deleted/unavailable folder on target machine since it's present on current set of tabs originated in another machine. That's one of the purposes of portability, right? Make portable user's life easier! Also, if a folder

Code: Select all

C:\Temp2\Temp\New Folder-04\

is deleted, when you double click the "Location currently not available" notice, you'll go to
C:\Temp2\ instead of just the immediate upper directory, C:\Temp2\Temp\. Holding CTRL while double-clicking or something could pop a dialog asking to create the New Folder-04 again, instead of the current awkward of going to level X, down to level Y, SHIFT+N (create new folder) and type desired name.

and finally
-pasting non-existent locations at the address bar: same stuff, "it doesn't exist: create?" (instead of the current "not found!/cancel" dialog). Currently this works only if such location is present on XY history. Why not having full support to create folders on the fly and an option to create them silently? Simple like that.

And yes, I'd prefer to delete (or have!) empty/useless folders created by such system rather than to tediously type their names each and every time they are gone for a reason or another. If sync'ing is in today's menu, I see no reason to still have a broken support concerning the base for sync'ing - the folders which will contain the files to be sync'ed!

[TheQwerty]

Thank you for summarizing things... allow me to jump around just a little.

-scripts that have hard-coded locations - one build a script for himself and does not bother in using the echo exists() solution remembered by zer0. So he has such folder available for him, but other users just got a broken script because they don't have such folder on their systems, and will never have a clue on what's going on.

I don't feel this is needed. I see where you are coming from but feel it would be better to bring up issues with such scripts in the forums so they can be improved or properly documented. A lot of scripts are written for specific user requests and not actually intended for sharing/others, but often a little bit of work is all they need.

Also, typically if the script requires a hard-coded location that does not exist then chances are there is more that will be broken with the script. Automatically creating these paths is likely going to mask some of the problems, which is not a good solution at all.

-pasting non-existent locations at the address bar: same stuff, "it doesn't exist: create?" (instead of the current "not found!/cancel" dialog). Currently this works only if such location is present on XY history. Why not having full support to create folders on the fly and an option to create them silently? Simple like that.

I don't follow what you mean with it needing to be in the history, all it takes is entering a non-existent path which ends in a '\' to get the create folders prompt. And this makes the most sense, as it avoids a ton of accidental folder creations taking place from the address bar. Considering Edit->New->New Path exists, I don't think we really need to kludge this into the address bar. Not to mention you can always prefix the location with '! mkdir' or '!! mkdir' to create the location via the command prompt.

-unavailable locations: quite often I save a set of tabs on a machine and for a reason or another I delete its counterpart on another. XY could tell me whether to create or ignore the currently deleted/unavailable folder on target machine since it's present on current set of tabs originated in another machine. That's one of the purposes of portability, right? Make portable user's life easier! Also, if a folder

Code: Select all

C:\Temp2\Temp\New Folder-04\

is deleted, when you double click the "Location currently not available" notice, you'll go to
C:\Temp2\ instead of just the immediate upper directory, C:\Temp2\Temp\. Holding CTRL while double-clicking or something could pop a dialog asking to create the New Folder-04 again, instead of the current awkward of going to level X, down to level Y, SHIFT+N (create new folder) and type desired name.

To clarify what you are talking about (this might help you, zer0):
If you have "Z:\New Folder-01\" open in tab A, and "Z:\New Folder-01\New Folder\" in tab B. Then within tab A you delete "Z:\New Folder-01\New Folder\". When you return to tab B you get this:

20100928-2009_28_1002 -.png (8.47 KiB) Viewed 2461 times

This also happens when XY cannot find the previous locations when it is opened.

I'd agree that there should be a button on this dialog (or a prompt triggered by the info icon), which would ask if you want to create the location. However, this should only be the case if some root level of the unavailable location exists.

In this example "Z:\New Folder-01\" exists so it should be possible to create "Z:\New Folder-01\New Folder\" but if I ended up on this tab when opening XY on a computer which doesn't have even a "Z:" drive then obviously XY should treat me like a moron and not even attempt to create the location since there is no existing root.

The wording in the list message is a bit confusing as it does blur the line between unavailable and non-existent paths more than elsewhere in XY, but I'm not sure how this could be improved as XY probably cannot differentiate between the two cases.


Nothing about the current support is actually broken.. if anything it's just incomplete.

[SkyFrontier]

TheQwerty:

I don't follow what you mean with it needing to be in the history, all it takes is entering a non-existent path which ends in a '\' to get the create folders prompt.

History.txt doesn't mention that. PowerDesk (which I still HAVE to use because of its dual tree) doesn't copy paths ending them with backslash - so it was a mere "copy-paste-frustrate" thing. AB history (or anything else) stores paths with backslash, and that's why I get the folder creation prompt each and every time when trying to reach unavailable folders from there. Problem solved - and another hint to new user's guide 2.0.

I see where you are coming from but feel it would be better to bring up issues with such scripts in the forums so they can be improved or properly documented.

...How I'd like this to be true! I have few projects with no participation at all (one to quote the latest) or even discouraging words (there's one epic that comes to mind, but I won't link it here for the sake of friendliness), several script requests which ended in nothing, tons of questions without a simple answer... So if I'm thrown on a "do-it-yourself-or-die", and that was also stated almost literally some time ago, I have to at least ask for tools I can deal with, wait... or die. "Oh, but you could LEARN!", other could tell about Darwin's laws and I'm still without *solution*. Sometimes simple stuff - but I just *can't script* (not with my current and even worse future scheduling). Well. Better live with this.

Also, typically if the script requires a hard-coded location that does not exist then chances are there is more that will be broken with the script. Automatically creating these paths is likely going to mask some of the problems, which is not a good solution at all.

In the strict case of auto-creation of folders, I just can't see HOW. I generically agree with your statement, but not in this case.

I'd agree that there should be a button on this dialog (or a prompt triggered by the info icon), which would ask if you want to create the location. However, this should only be the case if some root level of the unavailable location exists.

Totally agree - that's a sine qua non condition. Easier than that and XY could be able to read user's mind looking after the entire directory structure s/he wants to be there, real time.
Also, the random jumping-to-upper-levels really annoys me - specially if I'm not allowed to easily create the unavailable (deleted, whatever) directory right on the respective notice.

Nothing about the current support is actually broken.. if anything it's just incomplete.

I can understand Don's approach on "attack a problem as deeper as I can and jump to next", but totally forgetting a certain level of details produces abnormalities like:

Code: Select all

Config > File Operations > Enable BG Processing > Apply to...
[V] Backup [not yet supported!]  (can be queued)

...como assim?! (english: WTF?!) Something that CAN BE QUEUED, it's NOT YET SUPPORTED and CHECKED BY DEFAULT?! (feature is available since April this year, problem was reported/ignored Sep/06th and...?).
Now I'm merely taking notes, one day or another I'll put them all together and send a long, tedious e-mail which will probably be... ignored. That's life.
-and yes, I'm wondering (effectively *questioning* sometimes) what's going on.

[TheQwerty]

History.txt doesn't mention that.

Not only does History.txt mention this:

v8.80.0315 - 2010-02-20 16:53
* Now, when you attempt to go to a non-existing location you are prompted to create it on the fly. Will also create whole new paths (as long as the drive exists and is writable). This means you can now use the Address Bar as a quick and easy interface to create new folders or paths, and go there right away after creation. Nice!
Note: Since the Address Bar also supports entering files (not only folders) the above service only is delivered when the item in question ends with a backslash to show it's meant to be a path.

But the help file entry on Address Bar does as well:

(17) When you attempt to go to a non-existing location you are prompted to create it on the fly. Will also create whole new paths (as long as the drive exists and is writable). Note that the location must end with a backslash to enable this feature.

I see where you are coming from but feel it would be better to bring up issues with such scripts in the forums so they can be improved or properly documented.

...How I'd like this to be true!

Far as I can tell you haven't actually tried to make this true. You've gone on about this need to create hard-coded paths automatically, but I see no mention of any script where this is an issue. My point still stands that it would be better if you were alerting the script writer or posting in the thread where the script was that you're having a problem with said script.

I have few projects with no participation at all

Yeah good luck finding someone willing to go through and test, debug, and fix all of the scripts you've collected, but I don't see how this is related to the issue here?

I have to at least ask for tools I can deal with, wait... or die. "Oh, but you could LEARN!", other could tell about Darwin's laws and I'm still without *solution*. Sometimes simple stuff - but I just *can't script* (not with my current and even worse future scheduling). Well. Better live with this.

I think we get that you are too busy to ever get the chance to learn scripting, and believe me we feel for you since we're all just bathing in tons of free time and boredom here.

A little effort to show you are at least trying to be less dependent on the community when you request some off the wall script that is of limited or, more frequently, no use to anyone else, goes a long way.

Also, typically if the script requires a hard-coded location that does not exist then chances are there is more that will be broken with the script. Automatically creating these paths is likely going to mask some of the problems, which is not a good solution at all.

In the strict case of auto-creation of folders, I just can't see HOW. I generically agree with your statement, but not in this case.

It all depends on how the location is being used, if it's being read/write from then it's going to expect other content to be there. I really don't see how said scripts could be using these problematic locations and not expect them to have some content.

[SkyFrontier]

TheQwerty:

Yeah good luck finding someone willing to go through and test, debug, and fix all of the scripts you've collected, but I don't see how this is related to the issue here?

-You haven't actually read the post, right?
And that was written in the context of you suggesting that I should expect participation, and I was illustrating that such expectation is almost like a wishful thinking.

v8.80.0315 - 2010-02-20 16:53

Thanks for the info - I've actually searched it but not found, of course.
(but entering unslashed paths followed by "enter" could prompt me the creation of such location - it's a natural step!!!)

I think we get that you are too busy to ever get the chance to learn scripting, and believe me we feel for you since we're all just bathing in tons of free time and boredom here.

...that's not what I meant! Humpf! But some users (another intentional omission of a valid link to illustrate that it's a real thing) seem to think that scripting is as natural to human being as breathing. It's not, guys!

A little effort to show you are at least trying to be less dependent on the community when you request some off the wall script that is of limited or, more frequently, no use to anyone else, goes a long way.

Little effort?! You're kidding?! Man, there are already few scripts/frankenscripts/script-fixes spread all over the forum I've produced myself! (Not to mention my constant attempts to contribute any way I can, since I was invited to collaborate.) Later I'll try to gather some and produce a list. Limited or no use? Well - capitalize contents of the clipboard (partially done by Stefan; it's now a scripting function since v9.50.0001), file selector (enhanced as Select Items since v9.40.0109) and name replacer (ignored: useful to Talisman shell users and the same concept could be applied to other programs with similar structure for themes) may lead one to think they may not be that useless after all... Anyway, I wasn't thinking that global usefulness is the ultimate word when it comes to script requesting. Looking closely as I did when building the Scripts Library can even tell me the very opposite but... things have seem to changed, and that's changing me, too.

...but I see no mention of any script where this is an issue.

Catalog Maker (useless?! There's a whole segment for this kind of tool... all of them useless?!; it also illustrates no interest in participation, even for fixing a problem which seems to be simple for a scripter and is a good example that I'm not just a lazy guy throwing out wishes to satisfy my ego and enjoying the show), zakhar's project and others (I should take note on them, too...) are a few examples.
I believe that zer0's hint on using echo() could be converted into a template I could TRY to apply to those (listed or not) scripts myself, when/if revising the whole library. But it's useless indexing problems if I can't give a solution myself to each and every one. If I were suggested that the Library could be made a sticky, now I think the whole thing could be flushed. Pointless silly. No one cares.

Sorry guys (and some will scream "off topic!", too), but that's what I'm having on mind.

[TheQwerty]

-You haven't actually read the post, right?
And that was written in the context of you suggesting that I should expect participation, and I was illustrating that such expectation is almost like a wishful thinking.

Yep I've read your classified ad seeking someone to be your on-demand script fixer and writer, and my response is good luck finding someone willing to bend over backwards to fix all the scripts and work on your crazy ideas, and possibly more from others! It isn't a paid position is it?

Thanks for the info - I've actually searched it but not found, of course.
(but entering unslashed paths followed by "enter" could prompt me the creation of such location - it's a natural step!!!)

I'm not sure where you're looking but I went to the license lounge, opened History, and searched for 'prompt'. Result 17 is where I got the quote

Little effort?! You're kidding?! Man, there are already few scripts/frankenscripts/script-fixes spread all over the forum I've produced myself! (Not to mention my constant attempts to contribute any way I can, since I was invited to collaborate.) Later I'll try to gather some and produce a list.

My issue is the last time I tried to help, it seemed you weren't too interested in even looking at the basics in the help. Plus you didn't seem to learn from when I carefully explained why what you were doing wasn't valid. I find these frankenscripts are often more of a mess because you admittedly don't know what it actually does, and now the writers of the various scripts don't know either, so they have to try to understand what you've cobbled together, which often takes even more time than writing the script in the first time.

Limited or no use? Well - capitalize contents of the clipboard, file selector, and name replacer... Anyway, I wasn't thinking that global usefulness is the ultimate word when it comes to script requesting. Looking closely as I did when building the Scripts Library can even tell me the very opposite but... things have seem to changed, and that's changing me, too.

But again as far as I can tell no one else is really finding these things too useful (beyond giving Stefan practice). Speaking for myself, I don't have much desire to spend time or effort working on something that I don't see myself ever needing or using. Further, I have even less desire to maintain such things. Yet, I often get this vibe from your posts that you are moaning about people not stepping up to bat to be your scripting slave. If that's misplaced, my apologies.

And I'm talking about the script requests themselves. You desire and efforts to compile everything is great (even if I don't particularly agree with how you've gone about things).

...but I see no mention of any script where this is an issue.

Catalog Maker (useless?! There's a whole segment for this kind of tool... all of them useless?!; it also illustrates no interest in participation

Great now you've mentioned a script that is apparently using hard-coded locations.
Now the issue with that thread is what in the world is the script supposed to do?
Why haven't I jumped in to help on that thread? I have no clue what the script is to do, I don't know what you've gotten the script to do thus far, or what any of the actual problems you're currently seeing are. And since I don't know what to do, I don't know if it is of any use to me, so my desire to spend any time on it is extremely low.

zakhar's project and others (I should take note on them, too...) are a few examples.

And now that they've been identified maybe someone (perhaps even myself) can try to take a look at them and update them to work without hard-coded paths.


Anyhow, yes we've gone quite off-topic, but I still don't agree XY should ever automatically create locations when they are not found in a script.

[SkyFrontier]

Hi, TheQwerty.
Prior to your answer I realized that I was (just like people expecting me to learn scripting) kind of pulling the branches to grow up the tree.
Now I'm sure - it just won't happen.
Sorry for bothering.