I use Opera 5.12 (the fastest browser on earth, so they say ) in the mean time !
just having the text in the code tags marked, copy and paste directly to uedit32 , works a treat !

Enough product placement for the moment

Will get back on-board the week after next ... There's some serious training awaiting me !

till then

Jochen

_________________________

Function (UDF) calls are a powerful addition to Kixtart that allow the development of modular,independant & reusable code but in most programming languages a more general subroutine call is also supplied. This allows more complex modular scripts to be written & it allows one to return extra values beside the function value - such as an error or a status codes.

Richard H. showed in the link below that Ruud implemented UDFs in a manner that allows us to use UDFs as if they were either/or functions or subroutines.

Richard's suggestion

Allowing people to use this type of calling convention will greatly increase the type of things that can be done in a UDF but it will make calling conventions much harder to define and document.

If we allow this type of convention I think it might violate Bryce's suggested rule of:

quote:

---

All information passed back out from a UDF should be passed via the return variable (UDF name).

---

Whatever route is chosen I think we need a well defined template posted so others can follow it. Maybe Martijn, you would like to post a first shot at it using everyone's suggestions. I suggest you make the template read only & the rest of us could offer changes in this discussion or in another discussion that allows us to post comments. You could then accept revisions to the template as you see fit.

[ 10 November 2001: Message edited by: JackLothian ]

quote:

---

When it becomes completely stable, mail Martijnl and ask him to promote it to the UDF forum. At this point he can check that the standards have been adhered to and post it to this forum.

---

Sounds good to me.

what are the standards ?
I think it's time to have a decision Martijn

J.

_________________________

If done, I'll add them to the Guidelines-post.

Thanks,

Variable name can be anything as long it was dimed to be local to the UDF

Global UDF variables should be $_ or something like that.

Does that sound good?

-Shawn

Here's a quick example:

$_globalvariable is declared global, so it is "visible" not only to the main script, but to all functions and other called scripts ... available everywhere

$localvariable is "dimmed" only within the function myfunction(), therefore it's scope is local and can NOT be referenced outside that function. This rather poor example demonstrates that one can access a global variable $_globalvariable from anywhere, but a local variable ($localvariable) only from within the function (it's dimmed in the function) ... because it's local to the function, this variable can have any name you want (which is a good thing) ...

code:

---

break on

global $_globalvariable 

$_globalvariable = "global"

myfunction() 

?"local="  $localvariable     ; this doesn't work, $localvariable doesn't exist
?"global=" $_globalvariable 

exit 1

function myfunction
 dim $localvariable ; <--- here's the local DIM
 $localvariable = "local" 
 ?"local="  $localvariable 
 ?"global=" $_globalvariable 
endfunction

---

-Shawn

[ 14 November 2001: Message edited by: Shawn ]

the BBS cut part of my post out.

my idea for the global variables was

$< udfname >_< variablename >

...

{edit..)

weird?? < test >

[ 14 November 2001: Message edited by: Bryce ]

[ 14 November 2001: Message edited by: Bryce ]

this is weird... the BBS is not letting me wrap a word in < > type brackets unless i put a space in there....

[ 14 November 2001: Message edited by: Bryce ]

for each $test in $tests
	? "testing"
next

A short reaction.

After reading all the comment we had some remarks about it:

• the board should not only for UDF's but also for scripts. Sometimes
  code should run also on a previously kixtart release, which can be
  an UDF.
  
• published UDF's must be related to member name. Possible reactions will
  inform the member (= creator of UDF).
  The contents of topics and reactions should not be influence by a moderator.
  A writter doesn't like that other persons are rewritting his book.
  Very restrictive way of publishing UDF's can stop the great amount of
  creativity of members. Many other (mostly commercial) sites are very
  restrictive in the way of using. Just a piece of freedom makes this
  board great.
  Of course it will not mean that no guidelines must be created. Specially
  the title of a topic is very important.
  Everybody must be aware that the guidelines doesn't give him a nasty fright
  in publishing a very nice UDF (idea). We saw some very nice and also very
  small UDF's on the forums, which doesn't need any comment at all. A good
  name for an UDF is also very important. And of course this forum should
  only contain scripts. Members will find there own way.
  
• A possible suggestion about removing information from the board
  isn't such a good idea. Also replacing them.
  Why?
  - sometimes links will be used to those topics.
  - what is the definition of obsolete? mostly we are thinking about "it is not
  running on all windows versions". we must realize that microsoft and other com-
  panies are publishing a great amount of new releases of there software which
  influence many scripts on this board.
  it will be an utopia that members will always upgrading their scripts. UDF's
  and scripts can be used and can give also ideas. It can inspire readers.
  Suggestions:
  - the moderator will standardize the topic-title. On the other forums a lot
  of titles doesn't reflect the contents of those topics.
  - the moderator doesn't only publish an accurate guideline document, but
  also a list of published topics which can be extracted from the topic-list.
  
• we like Bryce's suggestions about
  - variable usage: This way the internal workingsof UDF can not interfere with
  the calling script, no matter what variable names were used..
  it is very normal for programmers to do so.
  - store scripts in plain text. possible a location on the kixtart.org can used
  for that, but it would be nice that some other sites can be a backup for it.
  possible that all scripts can put in one ZIP file for downloading.
  
• the idea of Richard Howarth about promote it to the UDF forum
  we doesn't like at all.
  With this suggestion a member doesn't have any freedom at all. By implemen-
  tation of this for us the http://www.scriptlogic.com/kixtart site has
  more freedom and capabilities. Freedom: not so restrictive. Capabilities: you
  can vote on script, which may incorporated in kixtart itself and as creator you
  can see "how usefull your script is". The latest build shows the effects of vo-
  ting capabilities.
  See also next items for "why".
  
• the remark of Richard Howarth about he (moderator) can check the standards
  have been adhered can result in unexpected results.
  we think first at issues like:
  - presentation of commands, functions, macros and variables. f.e. commands must be
  lowercase, functions may not presented like 'GetFileAttr' but should be 'getfileattr',
  macros must be uppercase and variables must start with a letter.
  - the indentation usage
  - it isn't possible to put 'print'-statements in it. also no debugging code.
  - the variables aren't the wanted ones.
  question: what is the freedom of script creator which only want to share
  some code/idea with the kixtart population.
  
• the idea that members can't influence topics on this forum we doesn't
  like. It can be very frustating that you get a script without the knowledge
  what reactions were and are made on it, also it can very frustating for the
  creator of a script which can put an one-liner (f.e. a new version will release
  soon or a minor.major problem will be fixed) to his script topic.
  

Some questions:

• what to do with good (old) scripts on the other forums?
  
• how handles the moderator by an OPEN forum, when a simply
  kixtart question is put on it? inform sender and remove or close it?
  
• what happens with a CLOSE forum, when f.e. the moderator is on
  vacation or doesn't have the time anymore? Possible that Martijn
  can use an email address like scripts@kixtart.org.
  
• what to do with copyrights? publishing scripts by moderator suggest
  kixtart.org has the rights on it.
  for us all scripts are freeware and all copyrights belongs to creator
  of script.
  
• what are the benefits when we are introducing a CLOSE forum instead
  of using the function library on the http://www.scriptlogic.com/kixtart
  site?
  what disadvantages you are thinking of by a very restrictive forum
  for putting UDFs on?
  

btw: Martijn and other members don't think we are against the forum, but
we doesn't like extremly regulation of using it.

WE MUST REMEMBER "everything on this board is VOLUNTEER WORK"

Don't give members a nasty fright in publishing a very nice UDF (idea).

[ 16 November 2001: Message edited by: MCA ]

The reason for making the forum read only is that the moderator doesn't have to constantly review the content. I wouldn't want the moderator to have to keep reading all posts to check that they were OK. Many of the people who come to the board are new to KixTart, and new to bulletin boards so don't know the etiquette that we "Top 25 Posters" take for granted

The reason for the promotion idea is that all development work would take place in the scripts forum. The UDF would only be placed in the UDF forum when it is not likely to change.

One of the primary reasons for this forum is to reduce the noise. Good UDFs are getting buried within hours of being uploaded because of the high level of traffic on the board.

It is not the moderators job to change scripts or UDFs to fit the standards, but rather to suggest to the author what he will need to do to get it ready to post to the UDF forum, awkward when it is already posted.

The UDF forum FAQ should not have a fixed mail address. There is a link to the moderators profile on the UBB front page, and I suggest the instructions be changed to pick the mail address up from there. This way if the moderator changes there won't be a problem. If he's unavailable for a short while then the promotion will be delayed a little, but of course the original post in the scripts forum is still available.

The point about responses is a good one. I suggest that the post on the UDF forum should contain a link for "suggestions and comments" which points to the original message.

MCA,
You need not fight for freedom for freedom's sake. As Richard stated there are other forums where you can freely express yourself.

Martijn,
I have one small request. Please fix the case on the forum title. Since UDF is an acronym, it should be in uppercase.

As an aside, the biggest problem with the scripts forum is most of the entries are not scripts. The problem is the names of the forums. If a member has a question & it is not a beginner question where do they post it? Most people seem to think it should be posted in the scripts forum.

If in the UDF forum you are rigourous about deleting threads that do not contain a UDF, I think it would make a good compromise.

Lets just open-up the UDF forum and go from there ... everyone will pretty much adhere to the informal standards ... Martinj can clean-up the forum every so often and advise of anyone not following the rules ...

And let's allow feedback and constructive critizisms in there as well - as thread owner, the Author can repost amendments/enhancements to first post ... Allowing feedback will also act as an interesting audit trail and show the evolution of the UDF ...

As it stands, I think we're stiffling the forum with a lot of unneccessary rules and regulations ... not to mention maybe discouraging (scaring off) new folk from posting ... to bastardize a famous quote:

"I'd rather see a crooked UDF, than a UDF un-posted"

-Shawn

By the way - lots of source code library boards work this way ... the author posts the code ... than folks tack-on feedback and suggestions and the author responds/amends ... makes for some interesting reading ... sometimes even leads to function spin-offs and new ideas for other usefull functions ... all this from a unified single thread (idea).

-Shawn

The constraints being put forward will only work if martin is prepared to put in several hours of work every day. Quite frankly, I doubt any member or group of members could donate this level of support. I agree with Shawn, if you place these tight contraints on the forum you will kill it.

If you want loosey goosey, wild west frontier stuff, then open this one up and let the users vote with their back button.

As I see it we have nothing now so we have nothing to lose.