View Single Post
Old 04-29-2014, 02:49 PM   #8
varlog
actually it is /var/log
varlog ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.varlog ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.varlog ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.varlog ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.varlog ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.varlog ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.varlog ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.varlog ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.varlog ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.varlog ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.varlog ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
varlog's Avatar
 
Posts: 341
Karma: 2994236
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: usually Europa
Device: prs t1
Quote:
Originally Posted by DiapDealer View Post
Been using this quite a bit lately.


Quote:
I even made a few changes and got it to compile on Windows. I've chosen to use Sigil v0.7.3 to patch (I'm just not confident in v0.7.4 or the latest git). It "feels" a little precarious on Windows, but it works! I've had a few random crashes, but that could be my fault--with regard to the changes I made to get it to compile.
Is your windows environment perhaps 32b? If yes I'd be interested in executable (have 32b XP bitrotting somewhere around), in any case could I have the changes you've made, please?

Quote:
One thing I'd be interested in would be the ability to determine whether or not the script actually changed anything. It'd be nice to be able to skip the whole reloadResource or markBookChanged if the script in question didn't find anything to do. For example; if the smarten punctuation script didn't find anything to smarten, it'd be nice if Sigil didn't change the project to an "unsaved" state.
Well, yes... I wanted it too, but the work involved - save Sigil state, let script run (amok?), compare new Sigil state to old one - would mean some design decisions which I was not prepared to take yet. But it is on my wish list too .
EDIT: it would be relatively easy to implement it as a reaction to signal from script itself - but, as I don't write the scripts myself only sigil-malform existing ones, this solution seems not general enough to me.

There is one uninitialized int i in ScriptInterface::removeNotAccountedFor (ScriptInterface.cpp, line 401)
is: for(int i;i<htmlFiles.count();++i){
should be!: for(int i=0;i<htmlFiles.count();++i){
in case your compiler hasn't noticed!

In the meantime I've noticed some more things which must be absolutely taken care of...

Thank you for your input .

Last edited by varlog; 04-29-2014 at 05:04 PM. Reason: afterthought
varlog is offline   Reply With Quote