Auto Complete or Intelli Sense in Field's names typing

[YogiYang]

For the first part of the above, I would guess you just haven't used that many languages/IDEs, there are plenty that do not have autocomplete, or even any editor other than a plain text based one, but as I said before, it is a nice feature to have, just not a *must* have feature, and there are many ways to get it without paying a dime such as in various plugins, etc again, as I had mentioned previously.

For the second part, the charged version ($79. ) is not charging for that feature alone, there are 2 other features not available in the free Oss version, the ability to use all 3rd party extensions, and the ability to submit to the Apple app store (free apps). Both of those I would think contribute more to the price than autocomplete, again since you can achieve ac in so many other ways.

As Klaus pointed out, that is up to you of course, I certainly don't intend to waste your time, your thread was just one of two where this subject had come up and various other people may be interested to know it.

HOWEVER, as Richard pointed out, many other editors can be used to edit Lc scripts, not just the one that Lc ships with or GLX2. Limit yourself, and you limit your future, if you expand your learning, you might find trade offs that are acceptable or not, but you'll expand your possibilities immensely.

Bogs,

All your comments are taken constructively. I will keep that in mind. And thanks for your valuable inputs.

The charge ($79) is not that heavy that one cannot afford it. But one has to pay this every year and the apps developed have to be open source and that is absurd from my POV.

Again please understand I do not mean to be offensive here. I hope this community is open to constructive discussion.

Probably you have not used any other commercial tools except LC so you are saying this. Again if you are a Mac user then of course the number of free and reasonably prices tools for development are very few so I don't blame you for your comments.

You should look at free and commercial development tools available on windows. You will be astonished at what they provide and how well priced they are.

For example B4A, B4iOS, B4J. All these are commercial but reasonably priced with perpetual license which does not expire! (b4x.com)

I use Xojo for building multi OS apps on regular basis and it is fantastic tool.

As for dev tools that are provided on virtual yearly license that expires every 365 days I would advise you to look at LiveApps (https://liveapps.center/). I am sure you will not want to use LC after trying your hands on LA!!!!

Regards,

[YogiYang]

..., but as I said before, it is a nice feature to have, just not a *must* have feature, and there are many ways to get it without paying a dime such as in various plugins, etc again, as I had mentioned previously.

For the second part, the charged version ($79. ) is not charging for that feature alone, there are 2 other features not available in the free Oss version, the ability to use all 3rd party extensions, and the ability to submit to the Apple app store (free apps). Both of those I would think contribute more to the price than autocomplete, again since you can achieve ac in so many other ways.

it seems that there is contradiction here. If the free OSS version of LC does not support 3rd party extensions then how can I get AC feature without paying a dim?

After paying $79 I can only submit free iOS app not ones that are paid. While in case of using B4IOS at the same price I can submit paid iOS apps.!!!

[bogs]

Again please understand I do not mean to be offensive here. I hope this community is open to constructive discussion.

Constructive criticism is welcome almost anywhere, it just isn't always understood by everyone. Keep in mind that communicating through text is always harder than in person as it is so much more easily mis-understood

Probably you have not used any other commercial tools except LC so you are saying this. Again if you are a Mac user then of course the number of free and reasonably prices tools for development are very few so I don't blame you for your comments.

I am pretty much OS agnostic, I started using (and programming) computers in the IBM XT days, other than the introduction to the Altair in school. I have used assembler, C/C++, Pascal (one of my favs), and QuickBasic, until the Windows 98 period of time. I also had a Mac Plus somewhere along the way, but never programmed on it other than in Hypercard, which was mind blowing for the time period it was around.
...From that point I started experiementing with Linux and was still using Windows for my heavy lifting in programming. I started using VS 5 and 6 at that point. Eventually, like many others, I started delving into VB 5/6 for the front end, and C for the back end.
... More recently, as I put in the post 2nd to your original,

Heh, coming from languages like Realbasic, Delphi, and Vs 5/6, I feel your pain, however all is not lost.

The Realbasic I referred to is the forerunner of the Xojo your using now. I still frequently use Rb 5.5 and 2006, I just disagree with the way the IDE happened to go after that. As far as the first languages I used, like Assembler and C, I doubt I could write coherent code in either at this point without going through a lot of re-learning. Nor, btw, would I want to

All of the above is to point out I am no stranger to just about any IDE setup. Again, autocomplete can be very helpful, imho, it just is not a be all feature for me. However, your needs may well differ from my own, and I allow for that. That is why, also in that first post of mine in this thread, I mentioned GLX2 and various plug ins. Many many many people have come before us to Lc, and they have written whole reams of little programs that solve various deficiencies (from their points of view) in Lc, and before that Runrev and Metacard.

The various other tools you mention have been mentioned here before as well, such as B4 and its variants. These days I only run windows for testing, not programming, and then only in a virtual machine. My every day machine is Linux based, so Lc tends to suit that better than the next nearest competitor (again imho) which would be Xojo for me. LiveApps is certainly an interesting looking environment, but again not my cup of tea, I already have enough other languages to play with

On to your second reply -

it seems that there is contradiction here. If the free OSS version of LC does not support 3rd party extensions then how can I get AC feature without paying a dime?

I think the misunderstanding here is the way 3rd party extensions are distributed. Some are commercial, some (like the aforementioned GLX2) are Oss. By the way, as new as I still am to Lc, I may not express this correctly, if I do not, I hope some of the older and more experienced users will jump in to correct me
... The free Oss Lc (no cost) can use only the Oss plugins. Many of the plugins that do autocomplete are free, and can be freely used with Lc.
... Some plugins are commercial ventures, and are not usable with the free Oss version of Lc, but are now available for use in the pay-for Oss version of Lc, probably due to some hybrid structuring of the paid for Oss versions license and code.

Since Oss plugins are Oss released, you can certainly use them in the free Oss version of Lc with no issues, therefore as I say you can get autocomplete for no money since a long time now.

I should probably also mention I don't find a need for autocomplete at all at this point, and I do have some pretty large projects going. The language which seems incredibly verbose to a beginner seems incredibly concise to me now, and I am hardly an expert, or even barely out of newbie stage.

I hope this benefits you, or anyone who later comes to read this. If not, feel free to ask anything else, people here are not strangers to jumping in and helping

[jacque]

In addition to the editor included in the install, you can edit LiveCode scripts in just about any external editor, such as Eclipse.

What about GUI?

You can set up LC so it uses Eclipse or another editor when you open a script in LC for editing. When the changes are saved, they are applied to the object in LC. This way you have the full LC gui and the script editor of your choice.

I've never tried this but I know the feature is there.

[bogs]

Now that just sounds fascinating, I knew about external image editors but thats a new one on me

[bogs]

In addition to the editor included in the install, you can edit LiveCode scripts in just about any external editor, such as Eclipse.

What about GUI?

You can set up LC so it uses Eclipse or another editor when you open a script in LC for editing. When the changes are saved, they are applied to the object in LC. This way you have the full LC gui and the script editor of your choice.

I've never tried this but I know the feature is there.

Ever since I read this, I was looking for where this setting was, but could never find it. However, knowing Jacque's extensive time line in this language, I thought maybe I had not looked far enough back. I was right

I may have mentioned elsewhere that I had downloaded all the archived versions of the Mc IDE, and in the very oldest ones, there is indeed a setting to choose an external editor -

This option disappeared far as I can tell in any version going forward. I think my next goal is going to be making it reappear

*Edit - Since I don't see that option before this, or after, I wonder if Richard stuck it in there