Talk:AutoHotkey

message: Questions the article might answer...
How can AutoHotkey be backwards compatible with AutoIt v2 without copyright infringement? Why v2 and not v3? Why compatibility with AutoIt at all? Why not a completely independent scripting language capable of achieving the same goals?
:I don't it very deeply, neither AutoIt;
:It would be nice to point main differences between both softwares.
:It's true that AutoIt3 is capable of the same things has AHK with GUI, but is more easy to script complex tasks?
This sentence was not English! Anyway, it's good that this article exists in Wikipedia because Google is spammed when you search for automation software.
Well, for ease of use reasons, one can easily transform an AutoIt v2 script into an AutoHotkey one. Like AutoIt v2, AutoHotkey uses a syntax similar to the Microsoft ScriptIt syntax, but AutoHotkey is way more powerful than AutoIt v2 was. AutoHotkey uses this 'simple' syntax and is open source. AutoIt v3 uses Basic-ish syntax and is closed source. Try both, decide for yourself, both AutoHotkey and AutoIt v3 can deliver a lot. It would probably only depend on your specific need and your preferred taste or prior knowledge of syntax, which you'll use the most.
I would like to see how many times Auto Hot Keys was downloaded. I suspect a bunch.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cellurl (talk • contribs) 14:57, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Questions

message: I'm no AutoHotkey guru, but shouldn't the last line of the third example script that reads:
 ^+r::Send revert edits by it% to last version by %last%
read:
 ^+r::Send revert edits by %edit% to last version by %last%
instead? -- dockingmantalk 01:47, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in script? 

message: Avoid it to preserve your sanity. Inconsistent language/library. For example: Click %x%,%y% while MouseClick Left,x,y . Another is string vs. expression assignment and variable expansion etc.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.99.163.104 (talk) 19:55, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  user experience 

message: Just want to understand why you  reverted the url on the AutoHotkey page. As far as I know, http://ahkscript.org/ has become a link to AutoHotkey.com. — Ineuw talk 06:06, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you read this discussion? Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:39, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:   I read it now. It's interesting, thanks for the enlightenment. :-) — Ineuw talk 19:19, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Again 

message: Just a quick note to prevent an edit-war:
I do not care about the dispute that seems to be going on in their community.
So resolve this however you want, but please keep this page consistent.
I expect to find the release specified in the infobox on the website specified in the infobox.
So if you change the url back to autohotkey.com, please also revert the “latest release” info to the appropriate release and fix this sentence:
> In 2010, AutoHotKey v1.1 (originally called AutoHotkey_L) became the platform for ongoing development of AutoHotkey.[13]
--Chronial (talk) 10:28, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I care about the dispute so just don't change either. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:58, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Url / release info in Infobox

message: I've started Wikipedia:AutoHotkey, for tips about the use of AutoHotkey by Wikipedia editors. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:42, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  AutoHotkey for Wikipedians 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on AutoHotkey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111104142142/http://www.autohotkey.com/changelog/2004.htm to http://www.autohotkey.com/changelog/2004.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:44, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The final bullet under Features is "Quick code testing before implementing in another (more time consuming) programming language." I retired from computer programming 16 years ago and many things have changed, but I can't see the point in coding a routine twice, once in AutoHotkey and then again in C++ or Pascal.  The final implementation would have to be tested anyhow; why go through the process more than once? Why would a programmer's supervisor permit such a waste of time? And why introduce the possibility of mistranslating from one language to another? Peter Brown (talk) 00:17, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: While I do understand your point, I am thinking that maybe what was meant is prototyping. You can relatively quickly mock up a prototype that shows how a program would function and actually demonstrate it and test it with users. It won't be fast and perhaps it won't be accurate either, but it can show if the whole idea makes enough sense to program it in another language where making a prototype would take maybe 10 or 30 times as long but where the language has other wanted properties like stability, speed, precision, platform-independence, and many others. I'm just guessing, because the bullet text is not clear at all, but that's the explanation my brain gave me. If that was the meaning, the bullet should say "Prototyping before implementing in another, more time consuming programming language." Why use AutoHotkey for prototyping, you might ask? Well, maybe if the specific program you want to prototype is close to the core of what AutoHotkey does well, such as handling hotkeys, hotstrings, contexts, windows, graphical user interface interaction, etc. --Jhertel (talk) 00:50, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quick code testing? 

message: I removed the following example that didn't work (obviously, as it clears the clipboard as the first thing) and also is very fragile and poorly explained. I am moving it here to the talk pages in case someone wants to correct it, test it, and make it more robust. Also, it probably belongs on Wikipedia:AutoHotkey and not in the general article about AutoHotkey. --Jhertel (talk) 12:23, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed example 

message: With reference to the last of the "Examples": general readers are unlikely to know what URI-encoding is. Since the relevant article is linked, this would not be a fault if understanding this concept would deepen ones' understanding of AutoHotkey, the matter under consideration; it is, however, pretty irrelevant.
Alternatively, we could just drop the example.  The article does not need to — indeed, cannot — illustrate all of Autohotkey's features, and functions are one that could be omitted. Peter Brown (talk) 17:39, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that it's not the best example and a much simpler one could be used. I just added another example (QuoteSelection), mostly to have more to choose from for discussing and comparing, but "my" example isn't impressive either. I just tried to keep it understandable for most people not acquainted with AutoHotkey. Better examples of the power of AutoHotkey (short and simple script with a powerful and useful effect) would definitely be welcome. --Jhertel (talk) 22:50, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Your example does avoid, quite adequately, the problem of the obscure (to many folks) reference to URI‑encoding.  So why not delete the pre-existing  example?  You have superseded it. Readers should not need to try to cope with the older example before encountering yours.  Peter Brown (talk) 19:37, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  A separate problem is that it's starting to violate :WP:NOTMANUAL. If the examples are not pared back, I'll do it indiscriminately. Also, avoid references to the "other" product's site. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:52, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, given that threat I chose to simply remove what I found to be less useful examples. , I don't understand what you mean by "avoid references to the 'other' product’s site" when it comes to the examples. Could you elaborate? --Jhertel (talk) 23:59, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  I haven't reviewed the changes but the issue I was referencing was http://www.autohotkey.com/ vs the community fork version at http://www.auto-hotkey.com/. Sorry that it was vague. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:30, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A better example of a function is needed