Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

16048Re: functional, but dysfunctional also onclipboardchange and ^!clip

Expand Messages
  • notetab_is_great
    Feb 3, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In ntb-clips@yahoogroups.com, Alan <acummingsus@...> wrote:
      > (There seems to be not yet achieved sufficient communication so as
      to convey a
      > correct understanding about the important distinction between 1. to
      > a 2nd (or 3rd, etc.) clip while a clip is already currently
      > running --*versus*-- 2. the use of ^!Clip

      Commmunication is the hardest part about computers... knowing what the
      other fellow is saying so we comprehend and learn...

      > # 1 and # 2 are different. # 2 is *not* (not in actuality)
      > another clip while a clip is already running. Instead, what # 2 is
      doing is
      > it is "farming out" (or contracting to) (or, even better yet,
      "routing the
      > processing to").

      I think we agree on the difference between #1 and #2. #1, launching
      another clip while a clip is running, produces clips that appear to be
      running simultaneously. #2, using ^!Clip, which I call "nested
      clips", do not produce, and are not expected to produce, simultaneous
      execution: the ^!Clip operation suspends the first clips, performs the
      clip named as a parameter, and when that one completes, the first
      resumes at the next instruction.

      As far as I can determine, OnClipboardChange is a 2nd way, besides the
      user explicitly launching a clip, for a clip to be initiated. If
      other unnested-Clips are already running, it seems that
      OnClipboardChange can be successfully launched during ^!Delay
      operations in those other clips' operation sequence. But if any
      nested clip is currently running, then OnClipboardChange produces a
      beep, just like the user attempting to launch another clip while a
      nested clip is currently running.

      > Continued further below is that ^!Clip, however many times it is
      used, is to
      > be seen as a conglomeration of clips that in actuality are
      esentially they
      > are united as one huge clip. The point is that, since ^!Clip is for
      > the processing to", it is only one clip that is running no matter
      how many
      > times ^!Clip is used.

      When not thinking about simultaneous clips, your "united as one huge
      clip" comment is a reasonable interpretation of the matter, but when
      thinking about simultaneous clips, then there is a visible distinction.

      Initiation of donothing3 directly (one huge clip) does not prevent
      initiation of donothing4. Initiation of donothing3invoker, which has
      exactly the same set of operations as donothing3 because it calls it,
      does prevent initiation of donothing4, which proves there is a
      distinction between "one huge clip", and "united as one huge clip".

      > Are you trying to use clip as a programming language? It is not.
      It is a
      > macro language (a powerful macro language). Notetab is a text
      editor that
      > you can write clips/macros so as to "program (or automate repetitive
      > in) the editor".

      In my computer science classes, I learned that a functional computer
      can be created from two instructions: subtract, and branch if
      negative. For example, negation can be synthesized by subtracting
      from 0, addition can be synthesized by negating and subtracting,
      multiplication is a series of additions, etc. So I find that NoteTab
      supports subtract [ ^!Set %x%=^$Calc(^%x%-^%y%)$ ] and branch if
      negative [ ^!If ^%x% < 0 Skip_-3 ], so I conclude that it is a
      programming language. To me, a macro language is simply a linear
      sequence of operations, like a tape recorder/player. Once control
      flow and arithmetic are added to a macro language, it becomes a
      programming language.

      > But clip itself is *definitely not* a programming language. A
      > editor" is a term I've heard used about Notetab. But it is a macro
      > that is used to achieve this automation or so called
      "programability" of the
      > editor.
      > Oh, clip has likeness to, say, qbasic. I guess qbasic is considered
      as a
      > programming language. But clip is definitely macros language.
      > --

      So we disagree about what to call the clip language...

      > It *appears* to me that I've not yet *effectively* *totally*
      > to/with you.
      > I've no argument with you that your well made point quoted up
      > above "absolutely won't work".
      > But, once again (as per your lib below) and your well made point
      quoted up
      > above, you are *launching* a second (and 3rd, etc.) clip while
      another clip
      > is still running. And, AFAIK when a clip is running, it is not
      supported to
      > *launch* a 2nd clip (nor a 3rd, etc.) so that now two clips are running
      > simultaneously.
      > s/concurrently/simultaneously/; # perl substitution lingo
      > I'm using the term "simultaneously" to replace or in place of
      > term that you used.
      > AFAIK it is not supported in Notetab to launch/run two clips
      > That's not to say that sometimes it won't at least partially work or
      > under some circumstances but not others.

      You likely have more experience with NoteTab/clip than I do, so I'm
      not going to disagree with anything you say here... but I would like
      to make some terminology definitions so we can communicate better.

      1) documented: a feature that is explained in the documentation.
      Generally all documented features are also supported (see below).

      2) supported: a feature that is claimed to work by the purveyor of the
      product. Generally all supported features are also documented, but
      sometimes older features, while still supported, are dropped from the
      documentation in favor of newer, better features that encompass all
      the capability of the older feature, and sometimes the documentation
      of new features lags the development of the feature and its delivery
      in the product.

      3) bonus: a feature that is not documented or supported, but which, by
      experimentation, is found to work. There is no guarantee that such a
      feature will work in future versions of the product.

      > A Very *Important* distinction: If by "nested" you mean what I call
      parent and
      > child clips (where ^!Clip clip_name is used) -- to do so, this is *not*
      > simultaneously running more than one clip at once.

      I agree; and that is why I was surprised to discover that nested
      clips, which you call parent/child clips, prevent the simultaneous
      invocation of other clips, whereas "one huge clip" does not, even if
      they have the same sequence of operations.

      > So as to illustrate the "nested" and "levels":
      > Mr. Fookes, the author of Notetab, wrote the next clip library:
      > http://www.notetab.com/pad/index.htm
      > On that page, you can download the pad clip library. I
      suggest/offer that you
      > download that library and look at it.

      Yes, a very complex program.

      > I wonder if Mr. Fookes has something that we don't know about such
      as "tags"
      > for clips?

      Understanding such a complex program can often be better done by
      looking at the individual building blocks, and understanding them
      first... but I have no idea what tools Mr. Fookes might have for
      building clip libraries.

      > AFAIK, a *bonus* *if* it even works at all -- let alone whether or
      not it
      > works under more complex circumstances. AFAIK what's supported is
      only 1
      > clip running at a time, not 2 or 3 etc. clips launched and running
      at the
      > *same* time.

      So your theory is that simultaneous clips are a bonus feature.
      Certainly I couldn't find documentation for them, so they don't seem
      to be a documented feature.

      Yet Jody seems to write clips that use the feature, and so do others
      on this board. So it seems to be an acceptable use, perhaps it might
      be a supported feature, but it could be a well-used bonus feature.

      Can anyone declare that simultaneous clips are a bonus feature? What
      are the chances of them being removed, deprecated, or enhanced,
      respectively, in future version of NoteTab?

      If I build clips that depend on them, are they likely to continue working?

      Are there other limits that are likely to surface as clip complexity
    • Show all 19 messages in this topic