XYplorer Beta Club

In box "Stepping through a Script": could you add a button "UNstep, Continue Script"? Can help much in playing - pardon: in testing!

Still better: mark a command in list and "Stop At Marked Command", continuing Script, but simulating a STEP before executing the marked command. (Cmds above current should be disabled ) This would be the start of "Interactive Script Debugging"...

(Remember: you said, scripts are dangerous - and I think, people have to play / test quite a lot.)

Relax. There must be something left to do for 7.10...

Can't relax - I'm scripting

No chance for Unstep&Continue?
I think programming of "Continue up to Marked" could make some more problems...

PeterH wrote:Can't relax - I'm scripting

No chance for Unstep&Continue?
I think programming of "Continue up to Marked" could make some more problems...

Okay, I added a (n identical) context menu to both buttons on the dialog.

The last for me to verify - and this doesn't seem to work?

I have a script "Step", made up of ::msg 1 ::step ::msg 2 ::msg 3 ::msg 4
1 is shown, then Step-Window - OK
right click button, chose "Continue Script without Stepping"
2 is shown, then Step-Window again! Cannot termitate stepping!

And if, in a script, I step just one command by ::?xxx, I see the same step-options? Here it would be fine to have an option "Continue with Stepping"? (As "default" for ::?xxx is "continue without".)

(Danke für diesen Ausrutscher - sonst würde mir das noch unheimlich )
Boys (and girls?): get out your dictionary - or go to www.leo.org

PeterH wrote:The last for me to verify - and this doesn't seem to work?

I have a script "Step", made up of ::msg 1 ::step ::msg 2 ::msg 3 ::msg 4
1 is shown, then Step-Window - OK
right click button, chose "Continue Script without Stepping"
2 is shown, then Step-Window again! Cannot termitate stepping!

And if, in a script, I step just one command by ::?xxx, I see the same step-options? Here it would be fine to have an option "Continue with Stepping"? (As "default" for ::?xxx is "continue without".)

(Danke für diesen Ausrutscher - sonst würde mir das noch unheimlich )
Boys (and girls?): get out your dictionary - or go to www.leo.org

Get out your manual!

+ Stepping through a Script: The dialog's buttons now have a little
context menu featuring one additional option "Continue Script
without Stepping". Select it to close the dialog and turn off
general stepping mode (the mode you select via toolbar, or via CKS
Miscellaneous / Scripting / Step Through Scripts).
When the unstepped script is done, stepping mode is automatically
reenabled.

Hey, for this I need 'implicite understanding', and must trust you (and your documentation) very much
You didn't explicitely mention ::step - so it will not function in this case...
..while for 'general stepping mode' it's ok. (Tested!)
(I must have had a reason to mention my ::step-command explicitely in reporting my problem?)

But still I would like to have the 'continue unstepped' funcion also after ::step-command.

By the way: the box "Stepping through a Script" appears on wrong screen for me. XY is on 2nd screen, box appears on primary.
(It's still the initial position - as XY doesn't writeback settings automatically for me. If I drag it once, it's correctly remembered for that session.)

PeterH wrote:Hey, for this I need 'implicite understanding', and must trust you (and your documentation) very much
You didn't explicitely mention ::step - so it will not function in this case...
..while for 'general stepping mode' it's ok. (Tested!)
(I must have had a reason to mention my ::step-command explicitely in reporting my problem?)

But still I would like to have the 'continue unstepped' funcion also after ::step-command.

By the way: the box "Stepping through a Script" appears on wrong screen for me. XY is on 2nd screen, box appears on primary.
(It's still the initial position - as XY doesn't writeback settings automatically for me. If I drag it once, it's correctly remembered for that session.)

step: other opinions?
2nd screen: This should be remembered between sessions. It's written to the ini file...

to step::
imagine a script with 20 or more commands, and a strange problem (scripts always have strange problems) starting maybe from the 10th. I put in ::step in front of 10th command, step until problem is seen, and then either terminate or want to 'run' to the end.
By the way: it would be fine, if we could change the value of a script variable, before doing next step...
(If I continue this way, you will have the best debugger that's possible at the end )

To box-position: as said, my XY isn't allowed to write ini - as I often would leave it in a way that's not ok for me. So I write ini only on explicite request. Could do this here, of course...

PeterH wrote:To box-position: as said, my XY isn't allowed to write ini - as I often would leave it in a way that's not ok for me. So I write ini only on explicite request. Could do this here, of course...

You have seen that I have implemented you wish concerning appdata path, don't you?

Sorry - you got me wrong. This is not for security!
I just like XY always to open in a pre-defined way. So I unselected "Save settings on exit".
If I want a change for this, I open a fresh XY, make the change, and explicitely save this configutation. (This is what wasn't allowed for a restricted user.)

With appdata I work since the first moment possible! (But, till now, just with a subdirectory of XY. For user-specific appdata I have the problem of not sharable scripts, for example. But I could move it to All Users\appdata...)

admin wrote:step: other opinions?

Yes, I agree with PeterH.
Both that a "Continue with Stepping" would be a good idea, and that it should affect step/unstep/? syntax as well, since from the user POV it's all the same : same way to have steps, same dialog, etc