XYplorer Beta Club

Different code snippets, or an bitmap... and i had CLCL running.

Now i shut down CLCL and have used your "Clear Clipboard" command .... testing with above script shows there is nothing in clipboard.

Then i copied
irgendwas.txt
new2.txt
huhhu.txt

to the clipboard
and execute the above script again...... with the same result... i get an extra dot after my filename to create a new file.

hmm... I think this is because when you use a regexp like the one you mentioned, the CR is part of $1 ! Not sure exactly why, but that's how it happens.

Meaning that there's no such "dot" in $script after the filenames, but a CR (0x13). That's why I used \r\n in my script, to make sure to only get the filename.

Slightly OT: Which is also why it be great if copy parsed&resolved would copy the actual stuff, not converted for visual presentation (i.e. no CRLF, not the entire content of variables/parameters...) or why I'd really love a way to see/copy the full content of variables.

jacky wrote:hmm... I think this is because when you use a regexp like the one you mentioned, the CR is part of $1 ! Not sure exactly why, but that's how it happens.

Meaning that there's no such "dot" in $script after the filenames, but a CR (0x13).

Yes that's what i think too.
But such non-visible stuff has not be visible (hence non-visible) at least non as default. For debugging it may from some use. But all IMHO (what do i know?)

That's why I used \r\n in my script, to make sure to only get the filename.

Slightly OT: Which is also why it be great if copy parsed&resolved would copy the actual stuff, not converted for visual presentation (i.e. no CRLF, not the entire content of variables/parameters...) or why I'd really love a way to see/copy the full content of variables.

I think you mean the same.

jacky wrote:hmm... I think this is because when you use a regexp like the one you mentioned, the CR is part of $1 ! Not sure exactly why, but that's how it happens.

Meaning that there's no such "dot" in $script after the filenames, but a CR (0x13). That's why I used \r\n in my script, to make sure to only get the filename.

Yep, this is what happens.

jacky wrote:Slightly OT: Which is also why it be great if copy parsed&resolved would copy the actual stuff, not converted for visual presentation (i.e. no CRLF, not the entire content of variables/parameters...) or why I'd really love a way to see/copy the full content of variables.

Give an example of the format you want, please.

Stefan wrote:But such non-visible stuff has not be visible (hence non-visible) at least non as default. For debugging it may from some use. But all IMHO (what do i know?)

¿Qué?

admin wrote:

Stefan wrote:But such non-visible stuff has not be visible (hence non-visible) at least non as default. For debugging it may from some use. But all IMHO (what do i know?)

¿Qué?

What?

I mean i didn't have to see such non-visible (or non-printable? ...now i am confused) ... just those chars from 0-31

because they are controll chars only and not meant to be visible.
Only if i had to debug an script it may be useful to see them.

Stefan wrote:

admin wrote:

Stefan wrote:But such non-visible stuff has not be visible (hence non-visible) at least non as default. For debugging it may from some use. But all IMHO (what do i know?)

¿Qué?

What?

I mean i didn't have to see such non-visible (or non-printable? ...now i am confused) ... just those chars from 0-31

because they are controll chars only and not meant to be visible.
Only if i had to debug an script it may be useful to see them.

The step dialog is for debugging, and I find it useful to see where's a CRLF instead of just a dot or middot for non-printable/visible. Where's the problem?

admin wrote: The step dialog is for debugging, and I find it useful to see where's a CRLF instead of just a dot or middot for non-printable/visible. Where's the problem?

OK, i see what you mean.
The problem is only when this replacements of >the non-printable chars< comes to the output too, as in my pic above, where i get "some.txt<dot>"

admin wrote:

jacky wrote:Slightly OT: Which is also why it be great if copy parsed&resolved would copy the actual stuff, not converted for visual presentation (i.e. no CRLF, not the entire content of variables/parameters...) or why I'd really love a way to see/copy the full content of variables.

Give an example of the format you want, please.

Well, I meant that using the Copy Parsed & Resolved command would not copy what we see on the window, but the full thing, including all CRLF and even if it's very long.
Also, if on the Variables window there was a way to, again, see the full content of each variable, it'd be quite useful. Maybe a ctxt menu on that list could give us a way to (a) see (in a new window some when using command text) the full content of the variable, and (b) copy to clipboard its full content.

Stefan wrote:But such non-visible stuff has not be visible (hence non-visible) at least non as default. For debugging it may from some use.

You realize you only see those on the Stepping window, which is indeed meant/used for debugging. They're never visible, used or anything elsewhere. Your pics above show that Stepping dialog, used for debugging, but there never was any "dot" put in the actual script, or used in filenames when renaming, nothing like that.

jacky wrote:

admin wrote:

jacky wrote:Slightly OT: Which is also why it be great if copy parsed&resolved would copy the actual stuff, not converted for visual presentation (i.e. no CRLF, not the entire content of variables/parameters...) or why I'd really love a way to see/copy the full content of variables.

Give an example of the format you want, please.

Well, I meant that using the Copy Parsed & Resolved command would not copy what we see on the window, but the full thing, including all CRLF and even if it's very long.
Also, if on the Variables window there was a way to, again, see the full content of each variable, it'd be quite useful. Maybe a ctxt menu on that list could give us a way to (a) see (in a new window some when using command text) the full content of the variable, and (b) copy to clipboard its full content.

By format I meant: in one line, or one argument below the other as shown in the bottom list or what? Including parentheses and semicolons ? ... etc.

jacky wrote: They're never visible, used or anything elsewhere. ..., but there never was any "dot" put in the actual script, or used in filenames when renaming, nothing like that.

What is that what you can see in the lower left on my pic?
And why windows gave me that error messages "wrong name"?

Stefan wrote:

jacky wrote: They're never visible, used or anything elsewhere. ..., but there never was any "dot" put in the actual script, or used in filenames when renaming, nothing like that.

What is that what you can see in the lower left on my pic?
And why windows gave me that error messages "wrong name"?

Because 0x13 is not allowed in file names.
The step dialog displays 0x13 as middot.

admin wrote:

Stefan wrote:

jacky wrote: They're never visible, used or anything elsewhere. ..., but there never was any "dot" put in the actual script, or used in filenames when renaming, nothing like that.

What is that what you can see in the lower left on my pic?
And why windows gave me that error messages "wrong name"?

Because 0x13 is not allowed in file names.
The step dialog displays 0x13 as middot.

Correctly, Don.

And that's why i think this wrong:

jacky wrote: They're never visible, used or anything elsewhere. ..., but there never was any "dot" put in the actual script, or used in filenames when renaming, nothing like that.

Stefan wrote:

admin wrote:

Stefan wrote:

jacky wrote: They're never visible, used or anything elsewhere. ..., but there never was any "dot" put in the actual script, or used in filenames when renaming, nothing like that.

What is that what you can see in the lower left on my pic?
And why windows gave me that error messages "wrong name"?

Because 0x13 is not allowed in file names.
The step dialog displays 0x13 as middot.

Correctly, Don.

And that's why i think this wrong:

jacky wrote: They're never visible, used or anything elsewhere. ..., but there never was any "dot" put in the actual script, or used in filenames when renaming, nothing like that.

So what would be your suggestion?

admin wrote:So what would be your suggestion?

I am think we where at that point already ... as i understood.

I think it's OK to show this non-printable as you do with "step through script"

Admin wrote:The step dialog is for debugging, and I find it useful to see where's a CRLF instead of just a dot or middot for non-printable/visible.

But they visible replacement should be dropped at the output... when i want to f.ex. create an file from it.

I have only an user view at this topic ;-)
But i am very confused that i have this \r\n as dot in my RegEx output where i have to take care to handle them.
I do often RegEx but never had seen the \r\n as dots.

Sorry, i can't make myself clear enough (i even didn't find the right words in german, how then in english)