Forums Feature Suggestions mircs internal editor.

syntax highlighting with customisable colours
block scope
white space ignored in statements for example if(%variable)||($identifer){command}
ability to use if statements without the nessasry braces eg.

if ($this) && ($that)
do this

- segment

syntax highlighting with customisable colours
-- ehh, debatable. There are several third party editors.

block scope
-- /help var

white space ignored in statements for example if(%variable)||($identifer){command}
-- Why? Is it diffult tto use your thumb?

ability to use if statements without the nessasry braces eg.
-- if (condition) $&
that

/help var is non existant . . ..

$& - ambiguous format without the braces!.

My mistake, /help /var. So very few use the /, that it slipped my mind to look for it as such syntax.

i agree with the syntax highlighting bit.
yes there are 3rd party editors. so what?
they made them because mirc didnt implemented it (yet).

the thing is, i dont use the 3rd party programs, because i find doing al + r faster. lol.

Yes faster and the fact that the 3rd part editors
leave enough to be desired to make me not use them.
I too would like to see highlighting added to the
internal editor, but I won't be holding my breath and
I won't be too awful disappointed if it isn't added.

Edit: Actually, not having the highlighting makes
a better scripter, forcing the scripter to find mistakes
on their own rather than holding their hand by
pointing out the mistakes and whatnot. Kind of
like being allowed a calculator in math class, yes
it's nice to have to make things faster for the things
you already know how to do, but not having it
keeps you from getting rusty and helps you keep
the ability to help others and show what you know.
My dad used to ground me when I was a kid if he
caught me using a calculator.

it doesn't make a better scripter, it makes a scripter spend ages looking for an error when they could just have it in bright red text.

True, that's why I said it would be ok as
a time saver, but the better you are at
scripting, the less time it takes to find
errors and correct them, also, the better
you are at scripting, the better you are
at not creating those errors in the
first place. Finding the error yourself
will make it less likely that you'll make
the same error next time.

I disagree, I think this is exactly why syntax highlight is good, because you'll find errors faster and you'll probably learn about them (that is, if you want to *learn* rather than only getting the thing done) and will less likely make them again.

Good point .. I guess it could be a learning
tool as well as a time saving tool, showing
what the mistake is along with where.

i dont understand how you can syntax highlight a mirc script anyway.

sure sure
"echo -s blah blah blah"
well that don take much to highlight

but then therse this

%fox $1-4 %blah $iif([ [ %god [ $+ [ $5 ] ] ] ],$eval($myalias($6)))

hmmm now where to start, and what does the command even do?

or worse

alias doit $1-

IMO you cant syntax check a langauge that can make its commands on the fly, same reason you cant compile it.

for that matter, what does a = strcat(a, b); do?

; this is a statement
%fox $1-4 %blah $iif( [ [ %god [ $+ [ $5 ] ] ] ],$eval($myalias($6)))

(Hope i didn't forget any items, there are a lot of [[color]] tags >:\)

So they mean just color different things different colors? not syntax checking at all.

well .. colored if the syntax is correct.

Like evh said, if syntax is correct, colors will follow. I wouldn't even mind if Khaled did it in steps. version 6.2 (or whatever) used some regex to check for a $<some_valid_identifier> and colored that one color. Then same with %blah with another color. etc. Just something to wet the appetite >:D