Why don't you just use the Source Code Control instead of modifying your own local copy of the script?

Also, why is that the SVN is readonly? You are forcing everyone to make its own branch.

@Kryptyx:
I doubt the real problem is data storage, that will only solve gesture persistence over chrome restart.
A problem that has not be solved yet is how to store ( even in memory ) gestures' actions.
At the moment actions are code lines, we really should think of a way of providing this feature even to users who don't know javascript.
I believe that this last issue is not resolved by storage facilities only, am I wrong?

Originally Posted by StevePaul

@Kryptyx

Don't have a problem with consolidation of code ...

However you need to be careful of adding functionality just for the sake of it ...

For example you currently have a 'Google search' gesture which is nice, but surplus (imo) to requirements ...

I use an extension which (without a click in sight) provides me with 6 options when highlighting text, which includes a 'Google search' and 'Translation' and another 6 or 7 options on one click.

Mouse gestures should be about doing the day to day activities, Chrome is heavily built around keyboard shortcuts and it is these (imo) that you should look to be replacing ...

Already CG is at the point where it does the good things really well and I would suggest people are already at the point where they will stay with the version they have because they can customise it (with their own gestures) and don't want to be continually having to edit new code ....

As for confusion, the creation of a gesture (in its current form) has a logical flow (Gesture, Action, Relations) so I don't see a problem there and it is all nicely packaged at the beginning of the script and easily readable ...

In reality you are not going to have loads of gestures, so changing the format isn't really (imo) achieving anything, other than p****** a few people off !!

The one advantage to the 'Old Way' was that you could easily identify the names of the gestures and their movements.

var newTabGesture = ["down","right"];

Gesture is called newTabGesture and the movements are down and right ...

Whereas ...

newGesture("down right", newTab, "Open a new tab. You can set the homepage in options.", "20,20,60,60")

You are searching to discern the name of the gesture and the movements, especially if there are more than just a couple of movements ...

There's an old saying 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it !!'

Just my opinion;-)

PS: I don't know who taught you to program (don't want to really), but the one thing you should know is that 'Comments' are the 'Life blood' of good coding and just as important (probably more so) as the code itself...

A line or two of carefully constructed comments can explain a hundred lines of code succinctly, saving ambiguity and misunderstanding and providing clarification to even the most uneducated (in terms of programming) user ... ;-)

Finally Wiki (like user guides) are by definition high level, if you want to edit code you need to know where to do it (more importantly - how) and that's what comments are for ;-)

I was not saying comments were bad, I was saying ASCII art and oversized comments are. I come from a server side background, so typically people don't see my source and I dont expect them to edit it. If they do though I comment what needs to be commented on. There is usually a backend documentation outside of the source that goes into more detail.

Most of my work revolves around OOP, you have one centralized object that handles only what it needs to. That was the idea of newGesture() function. Currently if there is a fault in one of the variables it will break the script, where the newGesture() function could handle that fault and keep the script working.

Cutting out 30% of the filesize by compressing how we assign gestures to me is a good thing. Obviously some people do not agree with that, but I suppose that tends to happen with open source projects.

As far as the "flow" of gesture creation, you still have it all in one function. It's more about control. When a GUI is setup to allow users to modify and add their own gestures they should not even need to touch the code. The GUI could then be designed to call newGesture() with the params the user filled out. You should never need to worry about the name of the gesture or it's movements. All that matters is that you are logically creating a new gesture, the movements you want can change, the function you call can also change.

In the end I was trying to remove overhead from the script.

Originally Posted by OpenNingia

Why don't you just use the Source Code Control instead of modifying your own local copy of the script?

Also, why is that the SVN is readonly? You are forcing everyone to make its own branch.
...

I dunno what that is. Also the SVN is read-only because you have to be a "comitter" or whatever to write to it.

Originally Posted by Kryptyx

...
In the end I was trying to remove overhead from the script.

The only problem Kyrax and I have is your doing it of your own accord before discussing with the project members how we could do this. Rather, you just assumed you know the absolute best solution and ran with it.
I don't mind having one function to do it all, but there are potentially better methods that we should take advantage of having three minds here to figure them out, or at the very least, potentially better designs for the registry function. (At least, I really don't like how you did the offsets in a string..) I only bring all this up to make sure you'll respond to the e-mails with more of a proposition than a description of the changes you made..you know? So we can all look at it and see if we can make any improvements on certain ideas and stuff without having to translate between code and ideology constantly.

@Kryptyx

As you so rightly point out, this project is Open Source...

You have invited people to customise your code and as such you have an obligation to provide them with the tools to do the job...

In this instance it is the use of comments (however they are written) and lots of them (imo)..

The 'premis' in terms of development is the more lines of code you have, the more lines of comments you have, the objective being to give people an insight into your thought processes (logic)..

Programming isn't an exact science, the result ultimately is the same (hopefully), however how it is arrived at can vary quite considerably ...

What can be frustrating to a developer (I know I've been there) is a users request for something that to you seems ridiculous ...

In this instance, I believe that as a 'normal' user, someone who uses your extension (and customises it) on a regular basis that I am well placed to comment on the structure of your extension ...

Through experience (a lot of it) I believe the original format of Gesture, Action and Relations is better suited to customisation by the 'novice' user than your new version, it gives clarity to the whole subject of 'mouse gestures' ...

However it is only my opinion (one that seems to be gaining support) ;-)

Hi...

Since Chrome went to 3.0.195.1 the extension seems to have stopped working... Also if you try and install it from scratch it says:

"Could not install extension from 'ChromeGestures.crx'. Invalid value for 'content_scripts[0].matches[0]"

Graham

This has been fixed with 1.0.7, you can download the latest version from the project homepage located here.

EDIT: Make sure you clear your cache before downloading this.

Originally Posted by StevePaul

@Kryptyx

As you so rightly point out, this project is Open Source...

You have invited people to customise your code and as such you have an obligation to provide them with the tools to do the job...

In this instance it is the use of comments (however they are written) and lots of them (imo)..

The 'premis' in terms of development is the more lines of code you have, the more lines of comments you have, the objective being to give people an insight into your thought processes (logic)..

Programming isn't an exact science, the result ultimately is the same (hopefully), however how it is arrived at can vary quite considerably ...

What can be frustrating to a developer (I know I've been there) is a users request for something that to you seems ridiculous ...

In this instance, I believe that as a 'normal' user, someone who uses your extension (and customises it) on a regular basis that I am well placed to comment on the structure of your extension ...

Through experience (a lot of it) I believe the original format of Gesture, Action and Relations is better suited to customisation by the 'novice' user than your new version, it gives clarity to the whole subject of 'mouse gestures' ...

However it is only my opinion (one that seems to be gaining support) ;-)

Again you fail to understand what I meant. I'm not saying comments are bad, I'm saying ASCII art and LARGE comments are bad. If the code is poorly written in that it needs paragraphs of text to describe how it works then most likely it could of been done a better way.

ASCII art should never, ever, be inside of a source file - its very tacky and only leads into bigger issues later down the road.

In the end I admit I was wrong for changing the structure of things without talking with Kyrax and Waha - however I still strongly feel that we need to re-structure the way gestures are created and maintained. I think both Kyrax and Waha agree on this part, its just a matter of how we do that.

I think perhaps the phrase 'paragraphs of text' is poorly chosen ...

You seem to be forgetting (yet again) that this extension was written with the intention that users could write their own Gestures, that means 'normal' people with no technical expertise ...

The 'text' is there as an aid to direct people to the relevant sections of code that need to be ameneded/inserted, its not there to explain the (your) logic ...

To be honest I'm now giving up with this ....

I have tried to give you (Kryptyx) the benefit of my experience all to no avail, fortunately Kyrax and Waha are little more enlightened ...

Your extension (in it's current form) does what I want, so I won't be bothering to update it for future releases ...

As for the use of 'ASCII art' in describing comments, I feel it is extremely disparaging and disrespectful, especially to me !!

Errrrm, StevePaul, as far as I can see by 'ASCII art' Kryptyx meant exactly that - ASCII art in the comments:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascii_art

How ever did we survive without Wikipedia ?

@fructal

I suggest you read it yourself ...

I wouldn't exactly call a box of asterixs surrounding some text as art !!!