Tools parameter: Prompt user with command line to modify

[Stefan]

Tools parameter: Prompt user with complete generated command line to modify it.

Hi Alex,

can you add an option to Tools
that when checked show an editable dialog box with Command and Arguments?

F.ex., Tool:

Title:          Test
Command:  iExplorer
Arguments: %FileName%
[X] Prompt user

Dialog: "C:\Program Files\Internet Explorer\IEXPLORE.EXE" "C:\Temp\Test\Example.html"
[OK]  [Cancel]


So i can double check the executable and modify the command line with temporarily arguments or parameter.



P.S., for others:
to check the command line you can see it in the status bar while hovering the tool button too.

[alex]

Hi Sefan,

check mail (private message).

So, based ob your super help with forum and etc I can add this even if I do not like this
Just a question, but maybe you can solve the problem but just adding empty interactive variable at the end of arguments?
And feel it with temporary parameters if you need?

Best regards,
Alex.

[Stefan]

Hi Sefan,

>So, based ob your super help with forum and etc I can add this
He thanks, but you don't have to  Not for that.


>even if I do not like this
Believe me,  i suggest only what could be of use for power users.
I on my own use an text editor not only for writing code but for many task i have to do all the days long.
Maybe i think and use HE just an other way as you may expect.


>Just a question, but maybe you can solve the problem but just adding
>empty interactive variable at the end of arguments?
>And feel it with temporary parameters if you need?
Of course i had already Arguments like: %Para before% %FileName% %Para after%
But i can't modify the command nor the filename.

For example
Sometimes i just want to change the command  from 'cScript' to 'wScript',
without using two Tools settings and two hotkeys.
SO being prompted with:
"C:\WINDOWS\system32\Cscript.exe X:\test\code.vbs"
i just would change cscript to wscript
"C:\WINDOWS\system32\Wscript.exe X:\test\code.vbs"
and try this situation.

Or from 'compiler12.exe' to 'compiler20.exe' to test if it me or just the new compiler need an different syntax.

Also i often made test with different utilities, all being in one single folder.
If i was prompted with the command line, i could just change the utility name
and don't have the need to set up several tools who differ only on the utility name:
Example:
One Tool:  AppDir\Tools\sed %befor% %FileName% %after%
--- and on executing i can exchange 'sed' with 'grep' or 'awk' or 'sort' or what ever.
---> 1 Tool setup => Many Utilities.

Also i want to modify the filename and change the versions number
just to run my last version (not the currently open file) to see "what was it what went wrong?"
Example:
Prompt: \tools\tool.exe code3.vbs     ==> change 3 to 1 ==> and execute code1.vbs

Next arg: it is not nice to be prompted with %before% and then with %after%.
It is much more nifty to see and modify the whole command  line. 
Especially nice to see the complete command line in the  (the drop-down) history.
And not to see only the %before% history list and then the %after% one.
While seeing the complete command line it is more easy to crop an parameter
and paste it in an another order.

Explanation:
instead of "%Para before% %FileName% %Para after%"
i would just use %FileName% AND "[X] Prompt" and add my paramters there in one go.

Idea:
Maybe, instead of this "[ ] Prompt" check box, you may want to allow an '?' sign in
argument field to force launching the prompt? Just like TC does.
?%FileName%

So, why you "do not like this" ?

[alex]

the idea under the tool object in HippoEDIT is same as under Link object in Windows.
It is storage of the Run/Start Up parameters plus application path.
And it is not designed for changing of start up parameters every time. Also in this case icon has not too much sense because it is associated with application path and you would like to change it. What should be shown then on toolbar? Should you changes been saved and so on.
If you need to have another start up configuration, create another tool. As in Windows. This is old "paradigm" and clear for everybody using Windows.

All this comes from somehow mixing of purposes and objects and lead to unclear architecture and complexity. And this is what I want to avoid in HE. All functions should be simple and transparent.
Of course, experienced users want more and maybe for then it is not complex to understand interface plus functionality, but do not forget that experienced users grow from novice. And if you would make exploring of the functionality/interface complex, this novice would not never grow into experts, but would just drop the tool.

That is why I am always against of increasing of UI complexity and mixing of function purposes. There is no problem to add one more option to a combo/radio button - it does not add one more dimension of complexity, but new check box is one (from my point of view). So I always need to be sure, that this option would be used by most of users, but not by 1% . This is very important.

Back to your request:
What you need is a run command, with history. But not a tool. With possibility to catch output maybe ans some other options.

With %?% it is better, complexity of UI is not increased and for novice it is no difference in exploration complexity. But where you want to have it? Normally command field does not allow tags, except of some some special for current file (for simulating ShellExecute for a document).
Command line and argument line processed separately. So if I would introduce %?% you would get prompt only for arguments part. Also can you give me a link for a docu about ? in TC. Just want to know what is meant under it there.

Best regards,
Alex.

[Stefan]

Is it there much against your philosophy, please drop my suggest. Really.
But i don't think it is wise to create an programmers editor to please novices! I think this is an paradoxon.


So here are my though. And i don't want to convent you. Just what i think. You decide what to do!

> Icon, What should be shown then on toolbar?
The one defined in the tools dialog. All others are temporary only.

> Should you changes been saved and so on.
No. All others are temporary only.

> somehow mixing of purposes and objects
If i define an tool with parameter and let me prompt them to modify... i see no mixing up.

> novice would not never grow into experts, but would just drop the tool.
That may be. I agree. Just wondering why Mr. Ghisler makes a lot of money since years with this concept :/

> more dimension of complexity, but new check box is one
Do you feel better if i make suggestion to implement hidden function? (i mean it for real)
Where user have to read the help first to discover the features?
I know, not generally, but for such 'special' features. OK, i will do.

> So I always need to be sure, that this option would be used by most of users
And i think the most user will drop HE because of lacking features.

> What you need is a run command, with history. But not a tool.
No. That would mean two different places to setup the tools.
Because for your 'run command' i would look for all the possibilities from tools too.
To that i would say it is complex.
And mostly it is an tool i just want to modify once in a while. Modify once and drop after work.

> With %?% it is better, ... But where you want to have it?
My imaging is this: i guess you already build the command line from 'Command' and 'Arguments' to execute it? Right?
So i just wondering if you doesn't (IF %?% is found in Arg field) can provide me
this command line (the %?% removed) before calling ShellEx,
i can modify them, press OK, then you go on calling ShellEX.

> So if I would introduce %?% you would get prompt only for arguments part.
That's would help too, because i can easy see the complete before and after parameters and the filename.
Right now i see only part after part.


> Also can you give me a link for a docu about ? in TC.
I know no online link. Instead here's an copy from the TC help:

Special parameters:

? as the first parameter causes a Dialog box to be displayed before starting the program,
containing the following parameters. You can change the parameters before starting the program.
You can even prevent the program's execution.

[alex]

Hi Stefan,

what I do not like it is a new check box, that increase UI complexity.
As I wrote before, new entry in combo or new tag for template engine does not have such problem.

Increasing of the UI and interface exploration complexity without good reason this is against my philosophy

I would prefer to start with xml only or hidden function, and then extend it by a UI element when I see that a lot of people using it and change often.

That may be. I agree. Just wondering why Mr. Ghisler makes a lot of money since years with this concept :/

And mister Ghisler was first on the market of alternative file browsers... But do not see connection. having of ? in the parameters is not what I was against for.

My imaging is this: i guess you already build the command line from 'Command' and 'Arguments' to execute it? Right?
So i just wondering if you doesn't (IF %?% is found in Arg field) can provide me
this command line (the %?% removed) before calling ShellEx,
i can modify them, press OK, then you go on calling ShellEX.

Both command field and arguments field processed by template engine separately, once for command expanding (as one template) and then for arguments expanding (as another template). 

Thanks for TC docu. It is enough.

I can easy introduce new %?% tag which if found brings popup with complete expanded template (so fex with arguments field with all expanded tags).
This tag can be useful for all other usages of templates (in code editing).
Would it be fine for your purposes?
I would check, if it is possible to use it also for command field (there are some special stuff done for checks etc) but if succeeded you would be able to place %?% also in command filed and in this case would get two popups (once for expanded command line and once for argument field).

Probably.. I also need to extend %?% syntax, to push name of the popup...

Best regards,
Alex.

[Stefan]

Sorry, now i see / remember you asked me something. Sorry, i am too late now.
--

A> to place %?% also in command filed and in this case would get two popups
First test with 737 works, this means i get two dialogs.
Now i have to find something useful to do real test... tomorrow .. or weekend.

--

A> Probably.. I also need to extend %?% syntax, to push name of the popup...
Aha, NOW when i saw the dialog, i understand what this has to mean ('Please check template value')

--

S>That may be. I agree. Just wondering why Mr. Ghisler makes a lot of money since years with this concept :/
A>And mister Ghisler was first on the market of alternative file browsers... But do not see connection.

You should cite me in complete  
This was an answer to your fear about the problems of newbies with overloaded features 
>>> A> novice would not never grow into experts, but would just drop the tool.
>>> S>That may be. I agree. Just wondering why Mr. Ghisler makes a lot of money since years with this concept :/

But... Mr. G. has too all the good feature hidden. (Too many for my taste, i have dropped TC an dozen times for that very reason, before i got used to it).  So Total Commander and HippoEDIT has something in common, and i will try to follow your concept.

Thanks for the great work.

[Stefan]

Implemented with Version 739 => http://forum.hippoedit.com/index.php/topic,574.0.html
Thank you Alex.

---

FYI, Seen in Code Templates:

* the var "Confirm template %?%" is added twice.
* in return the var "Caret %|%" is missing from the list.

.

[alex]

Thanks Stefan,

I have already noticed that and corrected.
Would be available in new beta