It is currently August 12th, 2022, 2:14 pm

Nesting Variables

Changes made during the Rainmeter 4.1 beta cycle.
User avatar
jsmorley
Developer
Posts: 22533
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:02 pm
Location: Fort Hunt, Virginia, USA

Re: Nesting Variables

Post by jsmorley »

There really is a difference, at least in my mind, between something "deprecated" like the !Execute syntax, that used to be used with bangs, or the !Rainmeter... prefix on bang names, and this.

Those are actually "deprecated". While they won't hurt, they also don't do anything, they are pointless, just ignored by the code, and a waste of time. It's a reasonable idea to discourage them, to reduce confusion and get everyone on the same page.

These new "nesting variables" don't deprecate the standard syntax style. They are at once an "alternative", and have additional functionality when used to nest variables. However, if you are not nesting variables, they have no advantage at all over the standard syntax.

Ok, that's a fine line. In a perfect world we would try to support just the one, but consider this.

There are over a hundred pages of documentation that use the standard syntax for variables and section variables. Those would all be out of date and need to be changed. Every example skin, and all the Tips & Tricks pages as well.

There are many tens of thousands of posts on these forums that use the standard syntax in explanations, examples, and help for users. Those would all be out of date, and realistically can't be changed.

There are hundreds of thousands of existing skins on deviantART and other places. Pretty much every one of those would be out of date, and only a very small percentage, rounding to zero, would ever be updated.

So given all that, and the fact that I shudder at the thought of just a constant blizzard of "that's the old way, don't use it anymore" nags here on the forums, pretty much forever, means that we will deprecate the standard syntax in favor of the alternative nesting syntax over my cold, dead body. Not ever...
User avatar
raiguard
Posts: 660
Joined: June 25th, 2015, 7:02 pm
Location: The Sky, USA

Re: Nesting Variables

Post by raiguard »

jsmorley wrote:There really is a difference, at least in my mind, between something "deprecated" like the !Execute syntax, that used to be used with bangs, or the !Rainmeter... prefix on bang names, and this.

Those are actually "deprecated". While they won't hurt, they also don't do anything, they are pointless, just ignored by the code, and a waste of time. It's a reasonable idea to discourage them, to reduce confusion and get everyone on the same page.

These new "nesting variables" don't deprecate the standard syntax style. They are at once an "alternative", and have additional functionality when used to nest variables. However, if you are not nesting variables, they have no advantage at all over the standard syntax.

Ok, that's a fine line. In a perfect world we would try to support just the one, but consider this.

There are over a hundred pages of documentation that use the standard syntax for variables and section variables. Those would all be out of date and need to be changed. Every example skin, and all the Tips & Tricks pages as well.

There are many tens of thousands of posts on these forums that use the standard syntax in explanations, examples, and help for users. Those would all be out of date, and realistically can't be changed.

There are hundreds of thousands of existing skins on deviantART and other places. Pretty much every one of those would be out of date, and only a very small percentage, rounding to zero, would ever be updated.

So given all that, and the fact that I shudder at the thought of just a constant blizzard of "that's the old way, don't use it anymore" nags here on the forums, pretty much forever, means that we will deprecate the standard syntax in favor of the alternative nesting syntax over my cold, dead body. Not ever...
Woah, ok then. I guess I’m being too OCD about it. :oops:
”We are pretty sure that r2922 resolves the regression in resolution caused by a reversion to a revision.” - jsmorley, 2017