Re: Ping Owl: More examples...Snit
|Subject||Re: Ping Owl: More examples of "window 1"|
|Date||09/22/2016 22:09 (09/22/2016 13:09)|
|Followups||Octavian W. Lagrange (18h & 7m) > Snit|
[Reposted because it completely rips your claims apart and, gee, for some reason you skipped it. I expect you will never give a real response.]
On 9/21/16, 10:01 PM, in article wPmdnWV0P6Ip-H7KnZ2dnUU7-RWdnZ2d@giganews.com, "Marek Novotny" <email@example.com>wrote:
I spend a few minutes going through the conversation. Here are some highlights of Owl asking questions and NOT getting the concept. Yes, I *KNOW* you will troll and lie and deny... but maybe privately you will learn?SnitMarek Novotny
The problem he created with his moving of goal posts once it was explained to him. Sure.Marek NovotnySnit
It took Sandman to come in and provide you with enough hints to correct the issue Owl rightly predicted you'd have with your approach.
A direct lie on your part.Marek NovotnySnit
But as usual, we can tally this as yet another lie on your part to turn a simple task into a circus.
A direct lie on your part.
Honestly, Michael Glasser, I think you're an idiot... A circus clown. Think what you want.
By the way, I am not putting Owl down for not getting it. He is used to other scripting languages and to OSs which do not have the same capabilities. No harm done and I welcome his questions. I do wish he could have at least reduced his trolling during the time he was asking, but whatever.
This was the first time Owl asked about "window 1":
Owl: ----- I ask this because it appears that you are just instantiating Terminal and looping with actions on "Window 1" Help me understand that applescript: What part of the loop starts a new terminal so that "window 1" makes sense as referring to a different terminal? -----
Snit: ----- When you tell it do to a new command it does it in a new window by default. I can also, I think, send commands to specific windows. Window 1 is the top window on the stack. -----
I had no issue telling him. Later Sandman told him pretty much the same thing (noting it is shorthand for the "front window"). Owl also asked this:
Owl: ----- What is "doscript theCommand"? Is that a separate script? -----
It was a pretty silly question given how the line right above that one defined the variable "theCommand." Did I troll him over it? Nope! I responded like this: ----- OK, I know you are a good enough scripter where this is just a brain-fart on your part. Look at the line above where "theCommand" is defined. -----
But Owl still did not quite get what was going on. He thought each window was a separate instance of the terminal running (which is not the case):
Owl: ----- I believe Sandman says it switches to that running instance, so it would seem that any commands you "tell" it would affect those windows, if they were referenced by the same name ("front window", "window 1", etc). ------
I let Owl know I only had one instance of terminal running (you can have two but it is not the norm... so uncommon Sandman said it was not even possible).
Owl continued to be confused... thinking that each SCRIPT had a "window 1" for the terminal:
Owl: ----- So a second script that references a terminal's "Window 1" will send commands to another script's terminal "Window 1"? -----
This was not at all the case. I reminded Owl that there is only ONE "Window 1"... the front window. By then, though, Owl was sort of getting that there is only one "window 1" but he was still thinking there was more than one terminal running:
Owl: ----- What happens if you simultaneously run a similar script that has a few of the options changed? Strip it down to one terminal and make a copy of the script with a different color spec. Run one, then start the other one and see if it changes the "window 1" in the first. It very well may no longer see the "window 1" in the first as "window 1" anymore and therefore work correctly. But then there might be a race condition if anything happens to make the first script see its front window as "window 1" again. -----
I let him know there is only one terminal, and also told him: ----- Window 1 is always the front window. If you have two scripts running and altering which is the front then, sure, you can have problems. -----
[Added note: while it was clear there could also be issues if you sent conflicting commands to the same window I did not specify it in that quote.]
Owl AGAIN asked about two scripts talking to the same window: ----- Let's say two scripts are running, each making reference to Terminal's "Window 1". They each have to wait for something, then do something again with "Window 1". If we don't know which wait will complete first, is it possible for them to screw the pooch on this and do the "something" with the wrong window? -----
And I *again* let him know: ----- Sure... if you have two scripts working with the same object and you do not know what order they are doing things you can run into errors. -----
But Owl was still thinking of different terminals running, each with their own windows and a possible conflict between their names. He was not getting the concept well at all!
Owl: ----- | If you want to start a second instance of terminal you can,
That would seem to be the safest way if multiple scripts are running, each referencing Terminal's "window 1". -----
The idea one should run a second instance of terminal is not at all true, though, as I explained to him and have now even shown him.
Even with all of this, though, Owl *still* was lost. He had not followed the concept, explained to him multiple times, that YES, absolutely anther script could reference the same object:
Owl: ----- See if it weren't for this "there's only one Terminal" crap you wouldn't run into problems like this. ----- He was not getting the concept at all! He thought having a different instance run would somehow stop a different script from referencing an object. Completely wrong! Heck, even referencing by ID does not stop another script from getting a list of IDs and sending messages to those windows.
But Owl was lost. He was *STILL* thinking each script has its own set of terminal windows other scripts could not reference for some reason:
Owl: ------ The scripts don't realize that they are working with anything but the object they created, which they both know as "Window 1". -----
This was just completely wrong of him! And he went on and on with this nonsense:
Owl: ----- Script 1 thinks "Window 1" is the one connected to 10.0.1.2. Script 2 thinks "Window 1" is the one connected to 192.168.1.3. See a problem yet? -----
He was just NOT getting it! The script does not own the terminal's window 1!
Anyway... enough. I have proved my point and it is 100% predictable you will still troll me and lie.
-- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>