Include> function

[JRL]

Marcus,

I like the undocumented Include> function. It is going to let me do some things with dynamic creation of dialog boxes that I couldn't do from an executable before.

I don't know how much work you want to do to improve an undocumented function... but... Is there any way that it could work with variables?

For example the following line will fail:

include>%TEMP_DIR%~somefile~.scp

Take out the variable, replace it with the full path to the temp directory and it works just fine.

For the dynamic creation of dialogs, variables are pretty much a necessity. It would really be nice to have this work. On the other hand, there's probably not much of an audience for this feature.

Anyone else have an opinion on this?

Thanks for listening,
Dick

[jpuziano]

Hi Marcus and JRL,

I just wanted to second this idea. Making Include> recognize variables seems a good fit... especially if it works in a compiled .exe as well.

Seems odd though, enhancing an undocumented function. Marcus, could you tell us if Include> is subject to removal or do you plan on adding it to the documentation soon and making it an official part of the language?

[Marcus Tettmar]

Almost wishing I hadn't mentioned this function existed now. Yes, it will, of course, be finished off and made official in due course. There are some difficulties with this function regarding what happens during debug, but it will be completed and recognised (and will support variables). We're not going to remove it!

[jpuziano]

Hi Marcus,

Thanks for the reassurance that Include> is here to stay. I was looking to modularize some of my macros and just wanted to be sure first (it never hurts to ask).

If any macro coding wizards out there have any advice on modularizing functionality of scripts for re-use, scripts calling scripts, what works best etc., please share your insights.

Thanks again to all the contributors here who make these forums one of the best things about Macro Scheduler.