The Script Editor

[richmond62]

Recently some fairly forceful postings stating that the LiveCode in-built scriptEditor
is bad/awful/crap have turned up.

What is interesting, to me at least, is that those postings don't actually state what
is so, supposedly, bad about the scriptEditor.

I wonder if people could post here, clearly in simple sentences for 'simple' folk
like me what is, supposedly, bad about the scriptEditor.

If this doesn't happen, how on earth can the developers be expected to improve the scriptEditor?

[dunbarx]

I find the SE to be a wonderful tool. No issues at all since the red dot thing went away. I do indeed have a short list of enhancements that I would love to see. I know there are other SE's around (Richard Gaskin has one) but I never really investigated changing over.

Craig

[stam]

The SE is a great tool with many good things to say about it.
Having said that, there are some issues and pretending there aren't doesn't inspire confidence. I can't say i have any striking issues myself. And no showstoppers as such, but there are annoyances.

I wonder if people could post here, clearly in simple sentences for 'simple' folk
like me what is, supposedly, bad about the scriptEditor.

Issues for me (on MacOS):
1. Autocomplete works... sometimes. Sometimes it just doesn't (as in no autocomplete suggestions show up). Sometimes it partially works (eg it will autocomplete with IDE commands but will ignore local/script variables, handlers etc). Not reliable.

2. Slow speed. Scrolling a long script can be a tedious affair (visual frame rate when scrolling of about 3-5 frames per second). Sometimes typing is slow, with a visible delay between key strike and character appearing on screen.

3. Runaway scrolling. Doing a big scroll on a long script will frequently lead to the script just endlessly scrolling with no way of stopping it (particularly when when scrolling with the trackpad). Super annoying!

I have heard that some Windows users have had terribly slow speeds - on the few occasions i've used on Win10, i've not encountered this personally, but my usage on this platform has been very light.
I get the impression that many experience performance issues i think - compare with say coding in Xcode or Android Studio the speed feels slightly glacial. Usable, but can be annoying.


What i would like to see added:
1. CODE FOLDING. In capitals because i really can't stress how helpful that would be. LC encourages the practice of lumping all handlers into 1 long script. It would be extremely helpful to be able to dynamically hide code when not needed. I believe that Bernd did some work on this posted on GitHub, but there must be a reason it's not included.

2. Proper user-configurable syntax colouring. Yes there are options but they not great. Ideally the entire IDE would have a dark mode as well, to match the a SE window set to a dark mode. And have shareable colour profiles - look at Atom for example.

3. A way to save code snippets would be nice. I currently use Notes on mac as it's easily searchable but would be nice if was built into the IDE.

Well that's my 2 cents since you ask Richmond
Stam

[dunbarx]

Code folding would be wonderful. It is annoying to have to scroll long distances when moving back and forth between handlers that call each other. I have relocated such handler "sets" together to minimize the hassle. This works OK, but I would much rather hide handlers that are not pertinent to what I am currently working on. The list at the left of the SE is fine for quick navigation, and is the perfect place to select only those handlers that one wants to see at any given time.

One more button to show them all again...

Craig

[Mikey]

+1 on everything Stam and Craig wrote plus
Theming
Find contexts
Navigating complex projects

Since we started getting to use behaviors and .livecodescript files I have been utterly spoiled by being able to use Atom and ST for most of the code work. There are so many extensions that can be added to those editors. Being able to connect them to LCS makes the syntax checking and coloring work great.
Giving LC it's due, the SE has been better, recently (the last year or two - did Monte start working on it, then?). However the only time I'm in it is when I suspect I have some funky issue that maybe the SE will visualize, or when I'm working on a legacy project that has the scripts embedded in the stack.

[richmond62]

Theming?

Yeah, and why not fancy glasses too?
-

download.jpeg (5.01 KiB) Viewed 8904 times

-

My question was re FUNCTIONALITY, not
arty-tarty things which, really, are not that
important.

[Mikey]

Well, that didn't take long. The thread has veered into the insulting.

[richmond62]

I wa not trying to be insulting, and I'm sorry if you think those rather lovely spectacles are insulting,
but the messages (mainly on the Use-List) were quite insulting.

The POINT I was trying to make, rather than insult anyone, was that, surely, the FIRST thing to work
out is what is 'wrong'/ 'missing' with the scriptEditor in terms of its use as a script editor, and not
aesthetics (beyond where aesthetics might interfere with USABILITY).

[FourthWorld]

Well, that didn't take long. The thread has veered into the insulting.

Some are more accommodating in their communications than others. Richmond's posting history suggests you need not take personally anything he writes that appears hand-wavingly dismissive. He writes that way about a great many things, including the work of Mark Waddingham; at least you're in good company.

On aesthetics: I also like theming, but FWIW in my own script editor I found it too easy to spend way too much time on it, slowing progress on key functionality. Theming is one of those things that seems at first glance almost trivial to implement, but in practice requires a lot of very careful thought and planning.

And if theming were available for the SE, should it be limited to that? Would a user expect a theming choice to apply to other IDE windows?

At the moment the LC SE sometimes has issues keeping its line numbers in sync with the scrolling of the script. Things like that are clear must-haves. So in a comprehensive wish list, I'd put theming on it too. But in triage, I'd prioritize core features.

Given the scope and complexity of theming, if it were up to me I'd be inclined to consider it as part of a larger look-and-feel update to the IDE.

[richmond62]

Richmond's posting history

suggests that that is the way God (or possibly the Devil) made him, and at very nearly
60 he is unlikely to change much, so take him as he is, with a pinch of salt where appropriate.

And, looking around these parts, as well as the Use-list, he may be not the only
one whose comments need a bit of salt.

And, others mentioned, I'll remind you of what my Granny said to me when I was about 7 staying with
her in Dundee and going on about "the Queen": "She also goes to the bathroom."

[Francesco77]

As I mentioned in a former post the script editor is extremly laggy on my Win10 machine.

It's not only slow or something but really really slow.
Sometimes when typing a word with 15 characters it needs about 15 to 20 seconds till the last character is displayed in the editor.

As I wrote before there are some special settings that can be made, that make this a little bit better.
Unfortunately these settings are not easy to find and understand for unexperienced windows users.

So I think that speed and performance are the most annoying issues at least on some windows machines.

[golife]

@Francesco

I had big problems with performance on Win-10. Just last week, I purchased an refurbished system for under $300 with a fast SSD and enough RAM and an i7 processor, and Win-11 pre-installed. I do no longer notice problems with the script editor since then. Win-11 runs LiveCode without any change I could notice. I believe that it will not make a difference.

Probably, on both ends there are possibilities to improve: Better Windows performance detecting what stops LC from executing as it should, and better hardware. The first is mainly in the hands of the LiveCode Ltd.

Regards, Roland

[golife]

@FourthWorld , Richard

A bit off-topic -- even though the script editor is part of it:

I completely support the idea of a theming system that effects all of LC. Why? A modern look & feel and "widgets" out-of-the-box that simply follow modern design guidelines is a huge factor for offering and selling LC.

I do not know how many countless hours have been spent by all of us reinventing the wheel in trying to make things appear in a modern look & feel.

More and more I see implementations of Google's Material Design. It really gives a lot of insight studying it (even a bit). And so offer Apple and Microsoft, and others. Whether or not we like such giant companies, they influence the way people work using apps.

I have implemented some design system myself, but it should really come from LiveCode itself -- within their own interest of marketing a product that looks and behaves simply professional and well by today's and future standards.

To me, it is near to, if not THE priority number 1 -- as a selling point. If in the first millisecond people do not feel attracted from what they see, the door may close for now, and in future. People do not see bugs at first. They see a surface, the skin, the face...

It is marketing, yes. But it also gives us, the developers, the opportunity to develop according to interface standards without having to resort to hours of (useless) reinventing the wheel. Not everyone is a graphic interface designer. And we should mainly focus on the logic of the application and not on visual interface elements and programming of tasks that are all the same for almost everyone, again and again.

[richmond62]

it should really come from LiveCode itself

This should be the current mantra round these parts.

[mwieder]

The most recent version of the glx2 script editor supports code folding and custom colorization.

https://github.com/mwieder/glx2ScriptEditor