Just to Get It Out of the Way

[Michael Piz]

As I said in an earlier post, I'm an Automate noob arriving from the no longer supported Automagic. After a week of using Automate, I have my standard used-to-use-another-app-with-the-same-basic-idea "demands," which I'll list here now to get them off my chest:

1. Scripting, i.e. a "Script" block.
2. Free-form flow diagram editing, i.e. no grid. Even overlapping blocks. That goes hand in hand with…
3. Allow connections on any side (or corner, for "demand" #4) of a block, even more than one on the same side (corner). Do keep the colors, though. That's better than Automagic's monochrome blocks & lines.
4. Diamond-shaped Decision blocks. (This is more about standard flowcharting practice than Automagic.)
5. Not Automagic-related: Even with free-form editing, don't allow connection lines to overlay each other. Have multiples be the next pixel over or something. (That might be my mild OCD talking, but it is what it is. 😁)

There. Now I can get on with learning Automate and stop thinking about this. 😎

[Patrick Corgan]

I'm all for anything that will help make my flowcharts easier to follow and understand. These are great suggestions (my favorite is #5) and I hope they make it into Automate!

What do you mean by a "Script" block? Aren't Automate flows just scripts already? If you want to execute Linux commands there is a "Shell command" block that lets you do just that.

[Henrik "The Developer" Lindqvist]

1. It's on the to-so list. But it will likely be very limited, mostly for writing small calculations/algorithms.
   
2. Definitively no, OCD won't allow it, would also obfuscate the flows.
   
3. Unlikely. It would make flows even more difficult to interpret for novices.
   
4. No. I considered different shapes at first, but concluded they had too little space over for the caption. I might try different corner styles, e.g. round, square, beveled.
5. Always been on to-do list, but implementing it will be very difficult.
   

[Michael Piz]

Automagic has a built-in scripting language and "Script" blocks to put the scripts in. The "Shell command" block might do the job but for more than one command at a time you'd have to keep a shell script in an executable external file. I would very much prefer not to have anything executable stored outside the app. It would make maintenance difficult. I'm having a hard enough time building a subsystem that maintains a common JSON settings file for all my flows. Keeping up with external scripts,

? No thank you. 🤪

[Michael Piz]

1. Cool.
2. My OCD goes in a different direction, lol. I'd rather have that freedom. Maybe as an option?
3. I disagree but I'm also not going to raise a fuss. Of course, if the free-form layout is an option…
4. The space thing was a bit of an issue in Automagic, especially since I liked giving my own titles to blocks, more descriptive of precisely what I configured them for. (Then again, I name things in a very OOP way with little abbreviation so the names tend to get long.) Giving blocks titles is another feature I'd like to see. Also something like Automagic's list of blocks that you've already configured so you can just insert them again. Very useful, and much quicker than remembering which flow you put the block you want in, finding that flow, finding the specific block in that flow, copying the block, navigating back to the first flow, finding where you want to put it again, and pasting it. Which reminds me… (4a) Why does editing a flow always jump to the lowest-numbered "Flow beginning" block instead of where you were when you last left the editor? The app knows where that was because I keep watching it do that jump. I'd rather it stay where I was.
5. I can live with the way it is and upon further reflection having multiple lines next to each other might make tracing paths harder. Plus what do you do when there's 20 of them, right? I've been arranging my blocks so there's no overlap and the least crossing I can manage. It'll do. 😇

Again, I'm not complaining, just (mostly) venting the frustration of having to change my ways after years of Automagic. Automate looks like it does as least as much as Automagic and maybe more. In different ways, of course, but I worked with at least 20 different programming languages in an almost 40 year career in software, so it's not like I'm not adaptable. 😎

[Henrik "The Developer" Lindqvist]

2. As said, obfuscation is an problem.

4. Custom titles is just as unlikely, see #2. Post-it notes/pins will be the way to comment a flow.

4a. The position is currently not stores within the flow, it's a feature already on the to-do list.

5. There would be a limit of maybe 8, before it would start overlap anyway, since the block spacing is fixed.

[Jay Dee]

I like automate a lot - it may have a few limitations but it's far more advanced than Tasker for instance. Looked for automagic on the play store, couldn't even find it to try / compare.

What you can do if you need to run a custom script, is to upload your variables via a http request block and have a php / perl / ruby / python / etc script do processing for you and return the result. Obviously it won't have direct access to the phones devices / abilities but it'll work for data manipulation.

If it helps, i've never found any one particular piece of software that it absolutely perfect - it's how you bodge it that counts. For what its worth, i get a hell of a lot out of automate, including control and monitoring of a IP P/T CCTV camera. Don't dismiss this app too quickly for the lack of features you want, it's incredibly powerful especially on older devices such as android 5.1 which i deliberately rolled back to in order to use this great app.

[Michael Piz]

I'm definitely not dismissing Automate. I only posted those ideas because I'm coming from Automagic and it has those features. :)

The reason you can't fond Automagic in the Play Store is because it's no longer supported, which is why I'm here. It works for now but one day it won't, so I looked at replacements. It came down to Automate and Tasker and I chose the former.

I still have the Automagic APKs if you're interested, BTW. It's a great app and I hate to see it go but the developer ran into some unrelated problems and had to stop development. Automate looks like it will take its place nicely.

The only perfect software I've ever seen is anything I developed over my career. ;)

[L.Schmidt]

Automagic in its latest (and last) version is also available on their
webserver, under https://automagic4android.com/ - that's the full and
unrestricted version for no-pay.

> >>> 1. Cool.
> >>> 2. My OCD goes in a different direction, lol. I'd rather have

> >>> that freedom. Maybe as an option?

> >>> 3. I disagree but I'm also not going to raise a fuss. Of

> >>> course, if the free-form layout is an option…

> >>> 4. The space thing was a bit of an issue in Automagic,

> >>> especially since I liked giving my own titles to blocks, more
> >>> descriptive of precisely what I configured them for. (Then again,
> >>> I name things in a very OOP way with little abbreviation so the
> >>> names tend to get long.) Giving blocks titles is another feature
> >>> I'd like to see. Also something like Automagic's list of blocks
> >>> that you've already configured so you can just insert them again.
> >>> Very useful, and much quicker than remembering which flow you put
> >>> the block you want in, finding that flow, finding the specific

> >>> block *in* that flow, copying the block, navigating back to the

> >>> first flow, finding where you want to put it again, and pasting
> >>> it. Which reminds me… (4a) Why does editing a flow always jump to
> >>> the lowest-numbered "Flow beginning" block instead of where you
> >>> were when you last left the editor? The app knows where that was
> >>> because I keep watching it do that jump. I'd rather it stay where

> >>> I was. 5. I can live with the way it is and upon further

> >>> reflection having multiple lines next to each other might make
> >>> tracing paths harder. Plus what do you do when there's 20 of
> >>> them, right? I've been arranging my blocks so there's no overlap
> >>> and the least crossing I can manage. It'll do. 😇
> >>>
> >>> Again, I'm not complaining, just (mostly) venting the frustration
> >>> of having to change my ways after years of Automagic. Automate
> >>> looks like it does as least as much as Automagic and maybe more.
> >>> In different ways, of course, but I worked with at least 20
> >>> different programming languages in an almost 40 year career in
> >>> software, so it's not like I'm not adaptable. 😎 On Saturday,
> >>> February 27, 2021 at 2:49:50 AM UTC-5 Henrik "The Developer"
> >>> Lindqvist wrote:
> >>>>

> >>>> 1. It's on the to-so list. But it will likely be very

> >>>> limited, mostly for writing small calculations/algorithms.

> >>>> 2. Definitively no, OCD won't allow it, would also obfuscate
> >>>> the flows.
> >>>> 3. Unlikely. It would make flows even more difficult to
> >>>> interpret for novices.
> >>>> 4. No. I considered different shapes at first, but concluded

> >>>> they had too little space over for the caption. I might try
> >>>> different corner styles, e.g. round, square, beveled.

> >>>> 5. Always been on to-do list, but implementing it will be

> >>>> very difficult.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Friday, February 26, 2021 at 9:57:53 PM UTC+1
> >>>> piz...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> As I said in an earlier post, I'm an Automate noob arriving
> >>>>> from the no longer supported Automagic. After a week of using
> >>>>> Automate, I have my standard
> >>>>> used-to-use-another-app-with-the-same-basic-idea "demands,"
> >>>>> which I'll list here now to get them off my chest:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>

> >>>>> 1. Scripting, i.e. a "Script" block.
> >>>>> 2. Free-form flow diagram editing, i.e. no grid. Even

> >>>>> overlapping blocks. That goes hand in hand with…

> >>>>> 3. Allow connections on any side (or corner, for "demand"

> >>>>> #4) of a block, even more than one on the same side (corner).
> >>>>> Do keep the colors, though. That's better than Automagic's

> >>>>> monochrome blocks & lines. 4. Diamond-shaped Decision blocks.

> >>>>> (This is more about standard flowcharting practice than

> >>>>> Automagic.) 5. Not Automagic-related: Even with free-form

[Jay Dee]

The widget ability is nice, i do like that. Maybe Henrik could look at this too? - It is the one thing that Automate lacks IMO.

[Henrik "The Developer" Lindqvist]

Custom widget, notification and possibly activity/dialog layouts is already on the to-do list, until then use KWGT or alike.

[Akira Menai]

" Unlikely. It would make flows even more difficult to interpret for novices. "

This is a prime example of a developer saying "Screw your ideas, mine are better, because I say."

Having the lines capable of being attached to any side makes it possible to have flows with branches that can be kept in tidy groups, expanding horizontally instead of vertically (and without snakey lines using up room going from the bottom of one to the top of another right beside it instead of straight from side-to-side). It would also cut down on the amount of overlapping lines.

It's fascinating that he (they) have decided their way is more clear than the initial implementation of flowcharts for programming, yet for some reason the strict top-down, right-to-left implementation they prefer was never adopted despite the decades it could have been "discovered" in the programming field.

[Henrik "The Developer" Lindqvist]

I'm not dismissing any ideas outright, just saying i think it could be confusing if things aren't always where (novice) users expect them to be.

Regular source code programming flows from the top downwards.

I've never claimed my flowchart is "more clear" than any other, it's just a straightforward way of implement it.

[Akira Menai]

I can see how it might be slightly confusing if they "happen to find" lines flowing in an upward direction, but if they define the direction themselves, there should be no confusion. That capability also increases the amount of blocks capable of being displayed on the screen at the same time, which would further increase flow "readability" and comprehension. Along with, as mentioned, reducing the number of overlapping lines, which would be a big help.

There's no need to respond, I realize you're busy and I'm not trying to argue. It's just that Automagic users aren't giving you empty complaints wanting you to copy an interface, we are telling you the ways in which your interface implementation slows down and hinders the design and editing phase. Having more options for placement of things, and fewer overlaps, are helpful things. For example, when two fibers flow into the same box, there's no clear way to remove one line. You have to move both and replace whichever you want to remain.

[Jay Dee]

I personally would find upward lines an absolute nightmare. I have some complex flows setup on my device and trying to edit them / understand them after months of no edits would be a maintenance hell for me. Sorry Akira but I personally think Automate works well as it is.

As for automagic, sure it might have been great to you guys however you're obviously here because it's no longer possible to stay with it. Have you considered running both? - Automate once had an sms bug which meant it wouldn't sent SMS's reliably on many peoples devices (now fixed). As a workaround i used to get automate so save text messages and phone numbers in a text file. I then used Tasker to read that file every 15 seconds and send out the SMS. It worked very well for many months. I only stopped using that method because Henrik got SMS's fixed and I've now uninstalled Tasker. But you get the idea from that right?