If you're here, that means you read the call for contributors on
Lifehacker and are interested in contributing to the Lifehacker Coders
project. This is an experiment for me (Adam) in creating original
content for Lifehacker in the form of simple applications built using
AutoHotkey.
I chose AutoHotkey because it's a scripting language I'm familiar
with, and development with AutoHotkey is relatively fast and simple.
The problem (and strength) of AutoHotkey is that it's easy to script a
solution for yourself, but often those solutions are never abstracted
in a form that others can easily use. My assumption is that people are
much more likely to use an actual executable application over a script
that requires installing AHK, for example, so abstracting AHK ideas
into executables with GUIs is important.
Almost every software project I've developed for Lifehacker is an AHK
application, including:
I have experience in AHK and with programming, but I'm far from
expert. I learn a lot from commenters every time I write up an AHK
post, so I'm looking forward to the knowledge and ideas you can bring.
I want this to be as collaborative an effort as possible, so I'm open
to hearing whatever ideas you might have--whether we're talking
application ideas, ideas on how the process should work, etc.
I'm really excited about this experiment, and if you've made it this
far, I hope you are too. So, without further ado, let's hammer out
some details.
(Incidentally, I'd love to host our code on Google Code but have no
experience using SVN there. If anyone does, let's talk!)
Actually, let's stick to talk regarding the overall direction of the
Lifehacker Coders project here--things like scope, organization,
communication. I.e., this post is for talking about how the process
could work. I've put up a separate post for collecting application
ideas post here:
> If you're here, that means you read the call for contributors on
> Lifehacker and are interested in contributing to the Lifehacker Coders
> project. This is an experiment for me (Adam) in creating original
> content for Lifehacker in the form of simple applications built using
> AutoHotkey.
> I chose AutoHotkey because it's a scripting language I'm familiar
> with, and development with AutoHotkey is relatively fast and simple.
> The problem (and strength) of AutoHotkey is that it's easy to script a
> solution for yourself, but often those solutions are never abstracted
> in a form that others can easily use. My assumption is that people are
> much more likely to use an actual executable application over a script
> that requires installing AHK, for example, so abstracting AHK ideas
> into executables with GUIs is important.
> Almost every software project I've developed for Lifehacker is an AHK
> application, including:
> I have experience in AHK and with programming, but I'm far from
> expert. I learn a lot from commenters every time I write up an AHK
> post, so I'm looking forward to the knowledge and ideas you can bring.
> I want this to be as collaborative an effort as possible, so I'm open
> to hearing whatever ideas you might have--whether we're talking
> application ideas, ideas on how the process should work, etc.
> I'm really excited about this experiment, and if you've made it this
> far, I hope you are too. So, without further ado, let's hammer out
> some details.
> (Incidentally, I'd love to host our code on Google Code but have no
> experience using SVN there. If anyone does, let's talk!)
Are we limited to using only AutoHotKey or can we use other popular
scripting tools (e.g., Auto-It, KiXtart/KiXforms)?
I've actually been using KiXtart/KiXforms for many years now and have
built some semi-heavy applications for work, mostly involving remote
management and software deployment. Iv'e also used Auto-It in the
past and found it to be as powerful as KiXtart/KiXforms as well as
being able to manipulate using keyboard/mouse.
I'm not sure how powerful AutoHotKey is and I guess the question comes
down to the complexity of the applications we would like to build in
this project.
Let me know what you think.
skim
On Sep 25, 11:42 am, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Actually, let's stick to talk regarding the overall direction of the
> Lifehacker Coders project here--things like scope, organization,
> communication. I.e., this post is for talking about how the process
> could work. I've put up a separate post for collecting application
> ideas post here:
> On Sep 25, 11:29 am, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > If you're here, that means you read the call for contributors on
> > Lifehacker and are interested in contributing to the Lifehacker Coders
> > project. This is an experiment for me (Adam) in creating original
> > content for Lifehacker in the form of simple applications built using
> > AutoHotkey.
> > I chose AutoHotkey because it's a scripting language I'm familiar
> > with, and development with AutoHotkey is relatively fast and simple.
> > The problem (and strength) of AutoHotkey is that it's easy to script a
> > solution for yourself, but often those solutions are never abstracted
> > in a form that others can easily use. My assumption is that people are
> > much more likely to use an actual executable application over a script
> > that requires installing AHK, for example, so abstracting AHK ideas
> > into executables with GUIs is important.
> > Almost every software project I've developed for Lifehacker is an AHK
> > application, including:
> > I have experience in AHK and with programming, but I'm far from
> > expert. I learn a lot from commenters every time I write up an AHK
> > post, so I'm looking forward to the knowledge and ideas you can bring.
> > I want this to be as collaborative an effort as possible, so I'm open
> > to hearing whatever ideas you might have--whether we're talking
> > application ideas, ideas on how the process should work, etc.
> > I'm really excited about this experiment, and if you've made it this
> > far, I hope you are too. So, without further ado, let's hammer out
> > some details.
> > (Incidentally, I'd love to host our code on Google Code but have no
> > experience using SVN there. If anyone does, let's talk!)
To start out I'd like to stick with AutoHotkey--if only because that's
what I know, and I need to be able to manage and vet apps. On the plus
side, from everything I've read, AutoHotkey is *very* similar to Auto-
It (I think it's backwards compatible with AutoIt2), so you'd probably
be able to pick it up pretty easily.
On Sep 25, 2:30 pm, skim <skim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Are we limited to using only AutoHotKey or can we use other popular
> scripting tools (e.g., Auto-It, KiXtart/KiXforms)?
> I've actually been using KiXtart/KiXforms for many years now and have
> built some semi-heavy applications for work, mostly involving remote
> management and software deployment. Iv'e also used Auto-It in the
> past and found it to be as powerful as KiXtart/KiXforms as well as
> being able to manipulate using keyboard/mouse.
> I'm not sure how powerful AutoHotKey is and I guess the question comes
> down to the complexity of the applications we would like to build in
> this project.
> Let me know what you think.
> skim
> On Sep 25, 11:42 am, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Actually, let's stick to talk regarding the overall direction of the
> > Lifehacker Coders project here--things like scope, organization,
> > communication. I.e., this post is for talking about how the process
> > could work. I've put up a separate post for collecting application
> > ideas post here:
> > On Sep 25, 11:29 am, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > If you're here, that means you read the call for contributors on
> > > Lifehacker and are interested in contributing to the Lifehacker Coders
> > > project. This is an experiment for me (Adam) in creating original
> > > content for Lifehacker in the form of simple applications built using
> > > AutoHotkey.
> > > I chose AutoHotkey because it's a scripting language I'm familiar
> > > with, and development with AutoHotkey is relatively fast and simple.
> > > The problem (and strength) of AutoHotkey is that it's easy to script a
> > > solution for yourself, but often those solutions are never abstracted
> > > in a form that others can easily use. My assumption is that people are
> > > much more likely to use an actual executable application over a script
> > > that requires installing AHK, for example, so abstracting AHK ideas
> > > into executables with GUIs is important.
> > > Almost every software project I've developed for Lifehacker is an AHK
> > > application, including:
> > > I have experience in AHK and with programming, but I'm far from
> > > expert. I learn a lot from commenters every time I write up an AHK
> > > post, so I'm looking forward to the knowledge and ideas you can bring.
> > > I want this to be as collaborative an effort as possible, so I'm open
> > > to hearing whatever ideas you might have--whether we're talking
> > > application ideas, ideas on how the process should work, etc.
> > > I'm really excited about this experiment, and if you've made it this
> > > far, I hope you are too. So, without further ado, let's hammer out
> > > some details.
> > > (Incidentally, I'd love to host our code on Google Code but have no
> > > experience using SVN there. If anyone does, let's talk!)
> To start out I'd like to stick with AutoHotkey--if only because that's
> what I know, and I need to be able to manage and vet apps. On the plus
> side, from everything I've read, AutoHotkey is *very* similar to Auto-
> It (I think it's backwards compatible with AutoIt2), so you'd probably
> be able to pick it up pretty easily.
> On Sep 25, 2:30 pm, skim <skim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Adam,
> > Are we limited to using only AutoHotKey or can we use other popular
> > scripting tools (e.g., Auto-It, KiXtart/KiXforms)?
> > I've actually been using KiXtart/KiXforms for many years now and have
> > built some semi-heavy applications for work, mostly involving remote
> > management and software deployment. Iv'e also used Auto-It in the
> > past and found it to be as powerful as KiXtart/KiXforms as well as
> > being able to manipulate using keyboard/mouse.
> > I'm not sure how powerful AutoHotKey is and I guess the question comes
> > down to the complexity of the applications we would like to build in
> > this project.
> > Let me know what you think.
> > skim
> > On Sep 25, 11:42 am, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Actually, let's stick to talk regarding the overall direction of the
> > > Lifehacker Coders project here--things like scope, organization,
> > > communication. I.e., this post is for talking about how the process
> > > could work. I've put up a separate post for collecting application
> > > ideas post here:
> > > On Sep 25, 11:29 am, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > If you're here, that means you read the call for contributors on
> > > > Lifehacker and are interested in contributing to the Lifehacker Coders
> > > > project. This is an experiment for me (Adam) in creating original
> > > > content for Lifehacker in the form of simple applications built using
> > > > AutoHotkey.
> > > > I chose AutoHotkey because it's a scripting language I'm familiar
> > > > with, and development with AutoHotkey is relatively fast and simple.
> > > > The problem (and strength) of AutoHotkey is that it's easy to script a
> > > > solution for yourself, but often those solutions are never abstracted
> > > > in a form that others can easily use. My assumption is that people are
> > > > much more likely to use an actual executable application over a script
> > > > that requires installing AHK, for example, so abstracting AHK ideas
> > > > into executables with GUIs is important.
> > > > Almost every software project I've developed for Lifehacker is an AHK
> > > > application, including:
> > > > I have experience in AHK and with programming, but I'm far from
> > > > expert. I learn a lot from commenters every time I write up an AHK
> > > > post, so I'm looking forward to the knowledge and ideas you can bring.
> > > > I want this to be as collaborative an effort as possible, so I'm open
> > > > to hearing whatever ideas you might have--whether we're talking
> > > > application ideas, ideas on how the process should work, etc.
> > > > I'm really excited about this experiment, and if you've made it this
> > > > far, I hope you are too. So, without further ado, let's hammer out
> > > > some details.
> > > > (Incidentally, I'd love to host our code on Google Code but have no
> > > > experience using SVN there. If anyone does, let's talk!)
"The newly released Google Moderator (http://moderator.appspot.com/)
might be a useful way to collect and vote on app ideas. "
Oo, that's an interesting idea. What do you all think about deciding
on an initial pool of applications among ourselves... say 5-10 apps to
start out. Then we could run a poll on Lifehacker readers at large,
pick a few of the most wanted ideas, and focus on them first.
On Sep 25, 2:54 pm, Shane <srstcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The newly released Google Moderator (http://moderator.appspot.com/)
> might be a useful way to collect and vote on app ideas.
> I've used Google Code's SVN for projects and have no complaints. I
> think you're limited to 10 projects initially, but can request more...
> On Sep 25, 1:36 pm, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > To start out I'd like to stick with AutoHotkey--if only because that's
> > what I know, and I need to be able to manage and vet apps. On the plus
> > side, from everything I've read, AutoHotkey is *very* similar to Auto-
> > It (I think it's backwards compatible with AutoIt2), so you'd probably
> > be able to pick it up pretty easily.
> > On Sep 25, 2:30 pm, skim <skim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Adam,
> > > Are we limited to using only AutoHotKey or can we use other popular
> > > scripting tools (e.g., Auto-It, KiXtart/KiXforms)?
> > > I've actually been using KiXtart/KiXforms for many years now and have
> > > built some semi-heavy applications for work, mostly involving remote
> > > management and software deployment. Iv'e also used Auto-It in the
> > > past and found it to be as powerful as KiXtart/KiXforms as well as
> > > being able to manipulate using keyboard/mouse.
> > > I'm not sure how powerful AutoHotKey is and I guess the question comes
> > > down to the complexity of the applications we would like to build in
> > > this project.
> > > Let me know what you think.
> > > skim
> > > On Sep 25, 11:42 am, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Actually, let's stick to talk regarding the overall direction of the
> > > > Lifehacker Coders project here--things like scope, organization,
> > > > communication. I.e., this post is for talking about how the process
> > > > could work. I've put up a separate post for collecting application
> > > > ideas post here:
> > > > On Sep 25, 11:29 am, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > If you're here, that means you read the call for contributors on
> > > > > Lifehacker and are interested in contributing to the Lifehacker Coders
> > > > > project. This is an experiment for me (Adam) in creating original
> > > > > content for Lifehacker in the form of simple applications built using
> > > > > AutoHotkey.
> > > > > I chose AutoHotkey because it's a scripting language I'm familiar
> > > > > with, and development with AutoHotkey is relatively fast and simple.
> > > > > The problem (and strength) of AutoHotkey is that it's easy to script a
> > > > > solution for yourself, but often those solutions are never abstracted
> > > > > in a form that others can easily use. My assumption is that people are
> > > > > much more likely to use an actual executable application over a script
> > > > > that requires installing AHK, for example, so abstracting AHK ideas
> > > > > into executables with GUIs is important.
> > > > > Almost every software project I've developed for Lifehacker is an AHK
> > > > > application, including:
> > > > > I have experience in AHK and with programming, but I'm far from
> > > > > expert. I learn a lot from commenters every time I write up an AHK
> > > > > post, so I'm looking forward to the knowledge and ideas you can bring.
> > > > > I want this to be as collaborative an effort as possible, so I'm open
> > > > > to hearing whatever ideas you might have--whether we're talking
> > > > > application ideas, ideas on how the process should work, etc.
> > > > > I'm really excited about this experiment, and if you've made it this
> > > > > far, I hope you are too. So, without further ado, let's hammer out
> > > > > some details.
> > > > > (Incidentally, I'd love to host our code on Google Code but have no
> > > > > experience using SVN there. If anyone does, let's talk!)
Hey, I would definitely like to get involved with this project, I have
some coding experience in multiple languages and just started getting
my feet wet with AutoHotKey so I would like to contribute in some way.
On Sep 25, 2:29 pm, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you're here, that means you read the call for contributors on
> Lifehacker and are interested in contributing to the Lifehacker Coders
> project. This is an experiment for me (Adam) in creating original
> content for Lifehacker in the form of simple applications built using
> AutoHotkey.
> I chose AutoHotkey because it's a scripting language I'm familiar
> with, and development with AutoHotkey is relatively fast and simple.
> The problem (and strength) of AutoHotkey is that it's easy to script a
> solution for yourself, but often those solutions are never abstracted
> in a form that others can easily use. My assumption is that people are
> much more likely to use an actual executable application over a script
> that requires installing AHK, for example, so abstracting AHK ideas
> into executables with GUIs is important.
> Almost every software project I've developed for Lifehacker is an AHK
> application, including:
> I have experience in AHK and with programming, but I'm far from
> expert. I learn a lot from commenters every time I write up an AHK
> post, so I'm looking forward to the knowledge and ideas you can bring.
> I want this to be as collaborative an effort as possible, so I'm open
> to hearing whatever ideas you might have--whether we're talking
> application ideas, ideas on how the process should work, etc.
> I'm really excited about this experiment, and if you've made it this
> far, I hope you are too. So, without further ado, let's hammer out
> some details.
> (Incidentally, I'd love to host our code on Google Code but have no
> experience using SVN there. If anyone does, let's talk!)
I'm an avid LifeHacker reader and a huge fan of it's whole deal. And,
coincidently, I'd like to fancy myself an AutoHotkey scripter as well.
I definitely know my way around it, and it has completely
revolutionized the way I use the computer.
I've written tons of little scripts, but my biggest deal is a small
program that I like to call Lacuna (er, derived from Lacuna, a whole
or gap, and Laconic, expressing much in few words). It's a keystroke
launcher, kind of a cross between Enso and Ubiquity (it follows the
same verb-noun layout. But, because it's fully open-source and written
in Autohotkey, it's really easy to make it do things).
A brilliant example of it's functionality is the command "play." It
excepts subcommands (artist, album, playlist, genre...). If you don't
type one, it'll search for and play whatever you type. If you do,
it'll create a playlist of that artist/genre/..., put it on shuffle,
and pick a song. It doesn't shuffle for albums. It also enables you to
end a search with a bang, and it will look specifically for that
phrase. For example, play artist red! will play the artist "Red," not
"Red Hot Chili Peppers." It's so much easier to just tap capslock and
type "p <space> a <space> rush <enter>" and listen to some Rush than
weed through menus, browser panels, or search boxes. It's awesome.
This is specific to work on foobar2000, but the beauty of AutoHotkey
is that it wouldn't be hard to make it work with anything else.
It's got commands as basic as "open" and "search" to stuff like
"eject," "defragment," and my personal favorite, "tweet" (got that one
from the Lifehacker Launchy guide).
If you guys are interested, perhaps I could make a Jing video or
something to show you guys more of what it can do, because I'd be more
than willing to make it a bit more user friendly (read: not make users
edit the source to change options) and share it with the world.
~Brandon
On Sep 25, 2:29 pm, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you're here, that means you read the call for contributors on
> Lifehacker and are interested in contributing to the Lifehacker Coders
> project. This is an experiment for me (Adam) in creating original
> content for Lifehacker in the form of simple applications built using
> AutoHotkey.
> I chose AutoHotkey because it's a scripting language I'm familiar
> with, and development with AutoHotkey is relatively fast and simple.
> The problem (and strength) of AutoHotkey is that it's easy to script a
> solution for yourself, but often those solutions are never abstracted
> in a form that others can easily use. My assumption is that people are
> much more likely to use an actual executable application over a script
> that requires installing AHK, for example, so abstracting AHK ideas
> into executables with GUIs is important.
> Almost every software project I've developed for Lifehacker is an AHK
> application, including:
> I have experience in AHK and with programming, but I'm far from
> expert. I learn a lot from commenters every time I write up an AHK
> post, so I'm looking forward to the knowledge and ideas you can bring.
> I want this to be as collaborative an effort as possible, so I'm open
> to hearing whatever ideas you might have--whether we're talking
> application ideas, ideas on how the process should work, etc.
> I'm really excited about this experiment, and if you've made it this
> far, I hope you are too. So, without further ado, let's hammer out
> some details.
> (Incidentally, I'd love to host our code on Google Code but have no
> experience using SVN there. If anyone does, let's talk!)
I think that's a great way to get started. It might also be helpful
if we could see some lifehacker reader stats, such as OS versions,
power user vs otherwise, browser used, and so on. I don't know what
sort of info you have available that would be ok to disseminate to the
group, but, depending on what that info says, we might be able to
really narrow down app ideas.
On Sep 25, 2:58 pm, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "The newly released Google Moderator (http://moderator.appspot.com/)
> might be a useful way to collect and vote on app ideas. "
> Oo, that's an interesting idea. What do you all think about deciding
> on an initial pool of applications among ourselves... say 5-10 apps to
> start out. Then we could run a poll on Lifehacker readers at large,
> pick a few of the most wanted ideas, and focus on them first.
> On Sep 25, 2:54 pm, Shane <srstcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The newly released Google Moderator (http://moderator.appspot.com/)
> > might be a useful way to collect and vote on app ideas.
> > I've used Google Code's SVN for projects and have no complaints. I
> > think you're limited to 10 projects initially, but can request more...
> > On Sep 25, 1:36 pm, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > To start out I'd like to stick with AutoHotkey--if only because that's
> > > what I know, and I need to be able to manage and vet apps. On the plus
> > > side, from everything I've read, AutoHotkey is *very* similar to Auto-
> > > It (I think it's backwards compatible with AutoIt2), so you'd probably
> > > be able to pick it up pretty easily.
> > > > Are we limited to using only AutoHotKey or can we use other popular
> > > > scripting tools (e.g., Auto-It, KiXtart/KiXforms)?
> > > > I've actually been using KiXtart/KiXforms for many years now and have
> > > > built some semi-heavy applications for work, mostly involving remote
> > > > management and software deployment. Iv'e also used Auto-It in the
> > > > past and found it to be as powerful as KiXtart/KiXforms as well as
> > > > being able to manipulate using keyboard/mouse.
> > > > I'm not sure how powerful AutoHotKey is and I guess the question comes
> > > > down to the complexity of the applications we would like to build in
> > > > this project.
> > > > Let me know what you think.
> > > > skim
> > > > On Sep 25, 11:42 am, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Actually, let's stick to talk regarding the overall direction of the
> > > > > Lifehacker Coders project here--things like scope, organization,
> > > > > communication. I.e., this post is for talking about how the process
> > > > > could work. I've put up a separate post for collecting application
> > > > > ideas post here:
> > > > > On Sep 25, 11:29 am, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > If you're here, that means you read the call for contributors on
> > > > > > Lifehacker and are interested in contributing to the Lifehacker Coders
> > > > > > project. This is an experiment for me (Adam) in creating original
> > > > > > content for Lifehacker in the form of simple applications built using
> > > > > > AutoHotkey.
> > > > > > I chose AutoHotkey because it's a scripting language I'm familiar
> > > > > > with, and development with AutoHotkey is relatively fast and simple.
> > > > > > The problem (and strength) of AutoHotkey is that it's easy to script a
> > > > > > solution for yourself, but often those solutions are never abstracted
> > > > > > in a form that others can easily use. My assumption is that people are
> > > > > > much more likely to use an actual executable application over a script
> > > > > > that requires installing AHK, for example, so abstracting AHK ideas
> > > > > > into executables with GUIs is important.
> > > > > > Almost every software project I've developed for Lifehacker is an AHK
> > > > > > application, including:
> > > > > > I have experience in AHK and with programming, but I'm far from
> > > > > > expert. I learn a lot from commenters every time I write up an AHK
> > > > > > post, so I'm looking forward to the knowledge and ideas you can bring.
> > > > > > I want this to be as collaborative an effort as possible, so I'm open
> > > > > > to hearing whatever ideas you might have--whether we're talking
> > > > > > application ideas, ideas on how the process should work, etc.
> > > > > > I'm really excited about this experiment, and if you've made it this
> > > > > > far, I hope you are too. So, without further ado, let's hammer out
> > > > > > some details.
> > > > > > (Incidentally, I'd love to host our code on Google Code but have no
> > > > > > experience using SVN there. If anyone does, let's talk!)
And something I emailed you about earlier, an update to the Rocker AHK
script you wrote, adding chrome.exe so Google Chrome can rock back and
forth :P
Copy to your current rocker dir as "Rocker.ahk", right click, and
compile it!
And should I post this as a file? I don't particularly know about
editing stuff again on GG...
Shelby Munsch
; Rocker
; Author: Adam Pash <a...@lifehacker.com>
; A mouse rocker application -
; Script Function:
; Rocker lets you navigate certain applications
; by rocking across the left and right mouse buttons
;
RButton::
direction =
GetKeyState,leftMouse,LButton
if leftMouse = D
{
direction = right
active_window := WinExist("A")
rock(direction, active_window)
}
else
{
MouseGetPos,before_x,before_y
Loop
{
MouseGetPos,after_x,after_y
if (before_x != after_x) or (before_y != after_y)
{
;Msgbox,%before_x%, %after_x%
;Msgbox,%before_y%, %after_y%
Send,{RButton down}
break
}
GetKeyState,leftMouse,LButton
if leftMouse = D
{
active_window := WinExist("A")
direction = left
rock(direction, active_window)
break
}
GetKeyState,rightMouse,RButton,P
if rightMouse = U
break
}
}
KeyWait,RButton
if direction <>
return
else
Send,{RButton}
return
rock(direction, active_window){
alt_group =
firefox.exe,iexplore.exe,opera.exe,feeddemon.exe,chrome.exe
ctrl_group = itunes.exe
ctrl_tab = notepad++.exe,excel.exe,dreamweaver.exe,pidgin.exe
WinGet,process,ProcessName,ahk_id %active_window%
;MsgBox,Rock %direction% in %process%
if process in %alt_group%
{
Send,!{%direction%}
}
else if process in %ctrl_group%
{
Send,^{%direction%}
}
else if process = explorer.exe
{
Sleep,150
if direction = left
Send,{BS}
else
Send,!{Left}
}
else if process in %ctrl_tab%
{
if process = excel.exe
Sleep,150
if direction = right
Send,^{Tab}
else
Send,^+{Tab}
}
}
return
TRAYMENU:
Menu,TRAY,NoStandard
Menu,TRAY,DeleteAll
Menu,TRAY,Add,&Preferences,PREFS ;;; Set up preferences in later
release
Menu,TRAY,Add,&Help,HOMEPAGE
Menu,TRAY,Add
Menu,TRAY,Add,&About...,ABOUT
Menu,TRAY,Add,&Disable,DISABLE_TOGGLE ;;; Fix disable in later
release
;if disable = 1
; Menu,Tray,Check,&Disable
Menu,TRAY,Add,E&xit,EXIT
Menu,TRAY,Default,&Preferences ;;; Set up preferences in later
release
Menu,Tray,Tip,Rocker
Menu, Tray, Icon, resources/rocker.ico, , 1
return
DISABLE_TOGGLE: ;;; Suspending hotkeys for some reason
doesn't work for this
Suspend,Toggle ;;; Fix in later version
Menu,Tray,ToggleCheck,&Disable
return
READINI:
IfNotExist rocker.ini
{
MsgBox,4,Check for Updates?,Would you like Rocker to automatically
check for updates when it's run?
IfMsgBox,Yes
updatereply = 1
else
updatereply = 0
UpdateCheck:
;MsgBox,Checking
SetTimer, UpdateCheck, Off
UrlDownloadToFile,http://svn.adampash.com/rocker/CurrentVersion.txt,
%A_WorkingDir%\VersionCheck.txt
if ErrorLevel = 0
{
FileReadLine, Latest, %A_WorkingDir%\VersionCheck.txt,1
IniRead,Current,rocker.ini,Preferences,Version
if Latest != %Current%
{
MsgBox,4,A new version of Rocker is available!,Would you like to
visit the Rocker homepage and download the latest version?
IfMsgBox,Yes
Goto,Homepage
}
FileDelete,%A_WorkingDir%\VersionCheck.txt ;; delete version check
ABOUT:
Gui,2: Destroy
Gui,2: Add, Picture, x16 y20 w60 h60 , resources/rocker.png
Gui,2: Font, S28 CDefault, Verdana
Gui,2: Add, Text, x96 y20 w340 h60 , Rocker 0.2
Gui,2: Font, S8 CDefault, Arial
Gui,2: Add, Text, x36 y100 w380 h60 , Rocker adds mouse rocker
navigation to many popular windows programs, allowing you to, for
example, navigate forward and backward in your favorite web browser by
rocking your fingers across the mouse keys.
Gui,2: Add, Text, x36 y145 w380 h70 , `nRocker is written by Adam Pash
and distributed by Lifehacker under the GNU Public License. For
details on how to use Rocker`, check out the
Gui,2: Font, S8 Cblue Underline, Arial
Gui,2: Add, Text, x347 y173 w170 h30 gHomepage, Rocker homepage
; Generated using SmartGUI Creator 4.0
Gui,2: Show, h225 w459, About Rocker
I'm trying to keep things on topic, but I think my post there is worth
mentioning here since it involves possibly taking this coding group
into a real organized and unified direction by starting out with an
app that merges all of your favorite scripts. So just asking that you
check out my post there in the application ideas thread..
Thanks,
j
On Sep 25, 11:42 am, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Actually, let's stick to talk regarding the overall direction of the
> Lifehacker Coders project here--things like scope, organization,
> communication. I.e., this post is for talking about how the process
> could work. I've put up a separate post for collecting application
> ideas post here:
> On Sep 25, 11:29 am, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > If you're here, that means you read the call for contributors on
> > Lifehacker and are interested in contributing to the Lifehacker Coders
> > project. This is an experiment for me (Adam) in creating original
> > content for Lifehacker in the form of simple applications built using
> > AutoHotkey.
> > I chose AutoHotkey because it's a scripting language I'm familiar
> > with, and development with AutoHotkey is relatively fast and simple.
> > The problem (and strength) of AutoHotkey is that it's easy to script a
> > solution for yourself, but often those solutions are never abstracted
> > in a form that others can easily use. My assumption is that people are
> > much more likely to use an actual executable application over a script
> > that requires installing AHK, for example, so abstracting AHK ideas
> > into executables with GUIs is important.
> > Almost every software project I've developed for Lifehacker is an AHK
> > application, including:
> > I have experience in AHK and with programming, but I'm far from
> > expert. I learn a lot from commenters every time I write up an AHK
> > post, so I'm looking forward to the knowledge and ideas you can bring.
> > I want this to be as collaborative an effort as possible, so I'm open
> > to hearing whatever ideas you might have--whether we're talking
> > application ideas, ideas on how the process should work, etc.
> > I'm really excited about this experiment, and if you've made it this
> > far, I hope you are too. So, without further ado, let's hammer out
> > some details.
> > (Incidentally, I'd love to host our code on Google Code but have no
> > experience using SVN there. If anyone does, let's talk!)
Sounds interesting! I'm also quite into customizing stuff and
Autohotkey of course!
But: I'm using ac'tivAid. Its a script-framework for Autohotkey-
scripts and it covers some serious problems when building them: By the
time you have huge amounts of tray-apps running and you loose the
overview. In ac'tivAid you can bundle your scripts by either including
them completely or starting them with a ac'tivAid-UserHotkey: I have
lots of those and I already released 2 scripts that have been
published with ac'tivAid:
Surrounder: (new newest and most mature one) clamps your selected text
with usual clamping-characters such as (]" or >: For example: If you
hit "(" of course "(" is written. But if you have "bla" selected it
types "(bla)"
CalculAid: is supposed to make life with calc.exe a little easier:
Runs multiple times, moves to the cursor on startup and may capture
the selected number when you hit the CalculAid hotkey... (currently
its a little buggy)
OK: What I'm trying to say: There are even 2 Problems that you have
Autohotkey-scripts for solved in ac'tivAid: Texter and BetterRename.
And even lots and lots more: I don't know how much you like the idea
but I'd really suggest to develop scripts that have to run constantly
directly for ac'tivAid. As its much nicer for those type of scripts.
have a look here:
> Actually, let's stick to talk regarding the overall direction of the
> Lifehacker Coders project here--things like scope, organization,
> communication. I.e., this post is for talking about how the process
> could work. I've put up a separate post for collecting application
> ideas post here:
> On Sep 25, 11:29 am, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > If you're here, that means you read the call for contributors on
> > Lifehacker and are interested in contributing to the Lifehacker Coders
> > project. This is an experiment for me (Adam) in creating original
> > content for Lifehacker in the form of simple applications built using
> > AutoHotkey.
> > I chose AutoHotkey because it's a scripting language I'm familiar
> > with, and development with AutoHotkey is relatively fast and simple.
> > The problem (and strength) of AutoHotkey is that it's easy to script a
> > solution for yourself, but often those solutions are never abstracted
> > in a form that others can easily use. My assumption is that people are
> > much more likely to use an actual executable application over a script
> > that requires installing AHK, for example, so abstracting AHK ideas
> > into executables with GUIs is important.
> > Almost every software project I've developed for Lifehacker is an AHK
> > application, including:
> > I have experience in AHK and with programming, but I'm far from
> > expert. I learn a lot from commenters every time I write up an AHK
> > post, so I'm looking forward to the knowledge and ideas you can bring.
> > I want this to be as collaborative an effort as possible, so I'm open
> > to hearing whatever ideas you might have--whether we're talking
> > application ideas, ideas on how the process should work, etc.
> > I'm really excited about this experiment, and if you've made it this
> > far, I hope you are too. So, without further ado, let's hammer out
> > some details.
> > (Incidentally, I'd love to host our code on Google Code but have no
> > experience using SVN there. If anyone does, let's talk!)
Hi, I certainly would like to help. I have programming background. I
found AHK from LifeHacker and I am just getting started. I personally
used Autohotkey to create one of my launcher. It is a simple CapLock +
"Key" launcher for frequently used programs. By pressing CapLock only,
a gui will popup with the list of key assign in case it's forgotten.
On Sep 26, 4:10 pm, ewerybody <eweryb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sounds interesting! I'm also quite into customizing stuff and
> Autohotkey of course!
> But: I'm using ac'tivAid. Its a script-framework for Autohotkey-
> scripts and it covers some serious problems when building them: By the
> time you have huge amounts of tray-apps running and you loose the
> overview. In ac'tivAid you can bundle your scripts by either including
> them completely or starting them with a ac'tivAid-UserHotkey: I have
> lots of those and I already released 2 scripts that have been
> published with ac'tivAid:
> Surrounder: (new newest and most mature one) clamps your selected text
> with usual clamping-characters such as (]" or >: For example: If you
> hit "(" of course "(" is written. But if you have "bla" selected it
> types "(bla)"
> CalculAid: is supposed to make life with calc.exe a little easier:
> Runs multiple times, moves to the cursor on startup and may capture
> the selected number when you hit the CalculAid hotkey... (currently
> its a little buggy)
> OK: What I'm trying to say: There are even 2 Problems that you have
> Autohotkey-scripts for solved in ac'tivAid: Texter and BetterRename.
> And even lots and lots more: I don't know how much you like the idea
> but I'd really suggest to develop scripts that have to run constantly
> directly for ac'tivAid. As its much nicer for those type of scripts.
> have a look here:
> Yes ac'tivAid is hosted and powerd by the german publishing company
> heise. But of course its free and open source as well.
> eRiC
> On Sep 25, 8:42 pm, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Actually, let's stick to talk regarding the overall direction of the
> > Lifehacker Coders project here--things like scope, organization,
> > communication. I.e., this post is for talking about how the process
> > could work. I've put up a separate post for collecting application
> > ideas post here:
> > On Sep 25, 11:29 am, Adam <adam.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > If you're here, that means you read the call for contributors on
> > > Lifehacker and are interested in contributing to the Lifehacker Coders
> > > project. This is an experiment for me (Adam) in creating original
> > > content for Lifehacker in the form of simple applications built using
> > > AutoHotkey.
> > > I chose AutoHotkey because it's a scripting language I'm familiar
> > > with, and development with AutoHotkey is relatively fast and simple.
> > > The problem (and strength) of AutoHotkey is that it's easy to script a
> > > solution for yourself, but often those solutions are never abstracted
> > > in a form that others can easily use. My assumption is that people are
> > > much more likely to use an actual executable application over a script
> > > that requires installing AHK, for example, so abstracting AHK ideas
> > > into executables with GUIs is important.
> > > Almost every software project I've developed for Lifehacker is an AHK
> > > application, including:
> > > I have experience in AHK and with programming, but I'm far from
> > > expert. I learn a lot from commenters every time I write up an AHK
> > > post, so I'm looking forward to the knowledge and ideas you can bring.
> > > I want this to be as collaborative an effort as possible, so I'm open
> > > to hearing whatever ideas you might have--whether we're talking
> > > application ideas, ideas on how the process should work, etc.
> > > I'm really excited about this experiment, and if you've made it this
> > > far, I hope you are too. So, without further ado, let's hammer out
> > > some details.
> > > (Incidentally, I'd love to host our code on Google Code but have no
> > > experience using SVN there. If anyone does, let's talk!)
I did see in previous messages the desire to stick with AHK. I don't
want to pollute the discussion here but still wanted to extend an
offer for contributing to the overall project here. My personal
preference for scripting is to stick with VBscript as it is native to
Windows. On the other hand there are times that I reach for AutoIt,
which as already mentioned is similar to AHK, when that is more
appropriate for the task at hand. Heck, sometimes a simple old
fashioned batch file can work wonders. It's "the proper tool for the
job" concept that guides me.
I am a police officer in the suburban Buffalo, NY area and I am the
network administrator for my agency. It is in this capacity that I
found scripting to be essential to my day to day duties. I also do
some freelance consulting that mostly focuses on helping organizations
deploy their Windows based workstations. I've put together an entire
series of scripts I call the ScriptPack, that is meant to work with
unattended installations such as those generated by nLite. Most of my
work can be found at doitrightconsulting.net.
It goes without saying that everything I work on is considered free
and open source. If you think that I could make some useful
contributions, don't hesitate to contact me. If this post is
considered to be more static than sound, I won't be offended if it is
deleted.
|
