2101
General Software Discussion / Re: Shortcut Creator
« Last post by ewemoa on June 07, 2010, 06:47 PM »Thanks for the further explanation.
I am working on digesting it (and my food
).
I am working on digesting it (and my food
).
Recent Posts
).That small of a sleep shouldn't make that much of a difference. I put it in there as a failsafe against a user selecting many thousands of files and having their computer act unresponsive while that many shortcuts were created. Take it out...see if anything changes for Contro.Thanks for the suggestion. I will try that.-skwire (June 06, 2010, 07:15 AM)
yes, i was referring to the .zip download, also, by adding AutoHotkey.ini in the directory it won't write to the registry nor create a .ahk file in my documents.Thanks for sharing this
this is where i found the trick.
http://www.portablefreeware.com/?id=217
http://www.autohotke...orum/topic16490.html-stanmarsh (June 06, 2010, 04:45 AM)
Is something strange.I tried:
I have been manipulating the ini.
1. With only one option :The program fails when I let only one option.
1=%userprofile%-Contro (June 05, 2010, 02:24 PM)
2. The program is more powerful , but is not "ultra-fast". The interesting point when only one option is desired is inmediately creation.There is a sleep command in the loop that forces a pause. May be I can rearrange the code so that the sleep only happens if there is more than one item to make a shortcut of.
3. the program fails in the recreation of the ini file. I close the program. I edit the ini file. But after the environmental variables are not recognized.I don't understand what you mean by "recreation". Would you mind elaborating?
4. Feature one to many .Hmm, I don't understand. Would you mind showing me some screenshots?
I select the icon or subfolder in the active window I am. And automatically the same shortcut is created in all active windows i have opened selecting the option "Active Windows" or similar.
The option "This active Window" is irrelevant because the windows xp system come with that option almost directly.
Perhaps the best way of fast linking wil be two or more hotkeys. One , by example, to send the icon to the desktop, and other to open the general selection table.Let's come back to this after addressing the other points. Perhaps you can bring it up again later?
I got a request to make Axem compatible with autohotkey portable by not using the registry to read the autohotkey.exe path but instead finding the path to it. would you use this?By "authotkey portable" are you referring to the .zip download available via:-justice (June 04, 2010, 09:44 AM)
Thanks to folks mentioned below (sorry if I missed someone):
Idea based on post by Contro at
https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=22924.0
Code based on skwire's post at
https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=21927.msg197063#msg197063
skwire's code mentioned by jdd at
https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=22924.msg207668#msg207668
Code written in AHK by Chris Mallett
http://www.autohotkey.com/
Icon based on one from
Mark James
famfamfam.com: Silk Icons
http://www.famfamfam.com/lab/icons/silk/
Recommended blade assembly removal with wrench
(Caution: Do not remove blades unless absolutely necessary!)
though the Android devices I've had access to seem terrible at handling offline content with HTML fragment identifiers 
I started writing this book in the winter of 1998. (Here, in the southern hemisphere, that means the middle of the year. And "winter" is more like a mild autumn.) At that time, Lua was still in version 3.1. Since then, Lua went through two big changes, first to version 4.0, in 2000, then to version 5.0, in 2003.
It is quite obvious that those changes had a big impact on the book. Some parts lost their raison d'être, such as the detailed explanation around the complexity of upvalues. Whole chapters were rewritten, such as those about the C API, and whole chapters were created, such as the one about coroutines.
What is not obvious, however, is the big impact that the writing of this book had on the evolution of Lua. Not by chance, some of the biggest changes in the language were in areas not yet covered by the book at the time of the change. As I worked through the book, sometimes I suddenly got stuck in a chapter. I could not figure out how to start or even how to motivate it. It is when you try to explain how to use something that you better feel how easy it is to use it (or not). So, those difficulties were strong hints that some things in Lua needed improvement. Other times I succeeded in writing a chapter, only to discover, later, that nobody could understand or agree with what I wrote. Frequently it was my fault (as I writer), but occasionally we spotted another corner of the language that deserved some improvement. (For instance, the transition from upvalues to lexical scoping was triggered by complaints over a feeble attempt, in an earlier draft of this book, to describe upvalues as a kind of lexical scoping.)
The changes of the language deferred the completion of this book; now the completion of this book will probably defer significant changes in the language. There are at least two reasons for that: First, Lua 5.0 is cleaner and more mature than earlier versions of the language (partially thanks to the book). Second, the book adds weight to the culture around the language and therefore increases its inertia. This cultural-weight increase is the first of my main goals with this book. My second main goal is to increase even more the spread of Lua.
It's not a shell extensionAlso, not quite what was requested, but FWIW, here's what I have locally:-ewemoa (June 01, 2010, 06:38 PM)
What shell extension is that providing all those neatly categorized context menu items?-daddydave (June 03, 2010, 05:12 PM)
It's a little utility in AHK_L for consolidating certain types of AHK_L functionality into one place.Thanks for the SciTE4AutoHotkey link! When I looked this time, I spotted the portable version, so may be I will give it a try.I have tried it now. It looks quite interesting.-ewemoa (June 03, 2010, 04:17 PM)
thanks, ewemoa. do you use Notepad++ as well?What comes to mind at the moment, concerning my Notepad++ usage is:-lanux128 (June 03, 2010, 06:58 AM)
for editors with well formed syntax highlighters, one could try SciTE4AutoHotkeyThanks for the SciTE4AutoHotkey link! When I looked this time, I spotted the portable version, so may be I will give it a try. Somehow I had the impression that there wasn't a portable version so I had not tried it before. Reminds me of the potential value of continuing to check for some things -- things change, and things can be missed
Despite being an installer, the installation can be portable (uncheck the default editor box).
We received the blender this morningCool! Thanks for sharing the details of your experiences-Deozaan (June 03, 2010, 01:13 PM)
).ewemoa , what the meaning of atm. ?Sorry, it is short for "at the moment".-Contro (June 02, 2010, 07:52 PM)
you people and your hotkey shortcuts!I think Alt-X followed by an appropriate number of arrow key presses (1 or 2) and then Enter is doable, so the current state of things seems fine.-mouser (June 01, 2010, 05:23 PM)
Can I have this utility ?I was going to say 'sure', except I seem to be having trouble uploading via FTP, atm.-Contro (June 02, 2010, 08:26 AM)
The only thing is, IS the NSA interested in the data of MY hdd? I don't think so.Not so fast -- how will they know until they take a look?-JoTo (June 02, 2010, 02:55 AM)
Number of overwrites needed
Data on floppy disks can sometimes be recovered by forensic analysis even after the disks have been overwritten once with zeros (or random zeros and ones). This is not the case with modern hard drives. The bits on modern drives are so small that deviation of tracks between writes cannot be discerned by any means[citation needed].
According to the 2006 NIST Special Publication 800-88 (p. 7): "Studies have shown that most of today’s media can be effectively cleared by one overwrite" and "for ATA disk drives manufactured after 2001 (over 15 GB) the terms clearing and purging have converged."[6]
According to the Center for Magnetic Recording Research, "Secure erase does a single on-track erasure of the data on the disk drive. The U.S. National Security Agency published an Information Assurance Approval of single pass overwrite, after technical testing at CMRR showed that multiple on-track overwrite passes gave no additional erasure."[7] "Secure erase" is a utility built into modern ATA hard drives that overwrites all data on a disk, including remapped (error) sectors.
Further analysis by Wright et al. seems to also indicate that one overwrite is all that is generally required.[8]
