Here is were I am coming from:
In the SciTE installer I have made for AutoIt3 we have
it set up in a way that we can run the script being
edited with the latest Production version F5/Go or Run
it with the Latest Beta version using Alt+F5.
Now people can open example script by pressing a
Button the Helpfile which will open the Example script
for a giving subdrectory. To ensure people don't
override the original examples, we made them
read-only.... so you see what happens when they press
Alt+F5. They get prompted to save the script to
another file.
Second reason is that i created a LUA script that will
create x number of backups when Save is performed. I
don't want to create a backup when the script isn't
changed and ALT+F5 is performed.
So maybe it could be changed that we add another value
for Save.Before that will only saves the file when
changed or change the behaviour to be the same as used
by F5?
Jos
--- Bruce Dodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What are the advantages of not saving? Trade those
> against the potential
> side effects of not saving, like the ones April
> mentioned, and also the
> principle of least surprise. ("I told it to save
> before, but it decided not
> to save ... huh?")
>
> The are.you.sure=0 setting is also available, and
> may be closer to what Jos
> is looking for. However, are.you.sure is a global
> setting, so it does have
> its own side effects.
>
> Bruce
>
> "April White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> message
>
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Jos vanderZande wrote:
> >
> >>Is there any reason why the Command.Save.Before=1
> >>always saves the file in stead of using the same
> >>behaviour used by Command.Go ? (Only save the file
> >>when it is changed)
> >>
> > Jos, I think it has always been this way, but that
> does not mean it cannot
> > be changed.
> >
> > Though it is arguable whether "save before" and
> "save before if changed"
> > are comparable.
> >
> > If (and this is a big *if*) a script uses
> Command.Save.Before=1 and the
> > command tool itself then compares two file
> timestamps, with the above
> > change you are proposing, expected side effects
> would not occur.
> >
> > Let me use this example:
> > - you are editing a file with extension .xyz
> > - a command executes a CLI/console tool that
> converts an .xyz file into
> > .zyx which in turn is passed onto some viewer
> > - but the viewer is opened only if the
> conversion occurs,
> > - but the conversion only occurs if the .xyz
> file is newer than then
> > .zyx file
> >
> > I know that this is a long and windy example, but
> with your revision, the
> > viewer would never be displayed.
> >
> > This is a trivial example, probably better off
> implemented with
> > command.go.
> >
> > Are there any counter-arguments, ideas, etc?
> >
> > April
> >
> > --
> > I will strive to live each day as if it were my
> 50th birthday.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Scite-interest mailing list
> [email protected]
>
http://mailman.lyra.org/mailman/listinfo/scite-interest
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
Scite-interest mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.lyra.org/mailman/listinfo/scite-interest
