Topic: Invoking execfiles. (1 of 6), Read 26 times
Conf: VEDIT Suggestions
From: Peter Rejto
Date: Thursday, July 14, 2005 07:06 PM

Hello,

Let me start with a self-survey. I am an enthusiastic user of the USTARTUP.VDM macro. As per Ted's suggestion, I am putting all of my customization macros into this single macro file.

At the same time, I would like to be informed about the new developments. So, I thought to invoke Vedit with the USTARTUP.ORIG file as an execfile. This did not work. However, the a slight adjustment did. Specifically, rename this file to USTARTUP_ORIG.VDM

So, it seem that Vedit requires the invocation execfile to have a .VDM extension. Now it would nice, at least for me, to drop this requirement.

Thanks,

-peter.

 

Topic: Invoking execfiles. (2 of 6), Read 25 times
Conf: VEDIT Suggestions
From: Christian Ziemski
Date: Friday, July 15, 2005 02:05 AM

On 7/14/2005 7:06:19 PM, Peter Rejto wrote:

>[USTARTUP.VDM]
>
>At the same time, I would like to be informed about the new
>developments.

?

So, I thought to invoke Vedit with the
>USTARTUP.ORIG file as an execfile. This did not work.

No, How did you do that?

VPW.EXE -x USTARTUP.ORIG would work, but then that ORIG file would be processed after the USTARTUP.VDM (if enabled).

USTARTUP.VDM is called by STARTUP.VDM, so you would have to modify STARTUP.VDM to let the USTARTUP.ORIG being executed instead of USTARTUP.VDM.

>So, it seem that Vedit requires the invocation
>execfile to have a .VDM extension.

Not as I know of.


Christian

 

Topic: Invoking execfiles. (3 of 6), Read 24 times
Conf: VEDIT Suggestions
From: Peter Rejto
Date: Friday, July 15, 2005 10:27 AM

On 7/15/2005 2:05:37 AM, Christian Ziemski wrote:

>VPW.EXE -x USTARTUP.ORIG would work, but ,,,


Thanks Christian,

I did open Vedit with the -i(invocation) option and not with the -x option as you did.

Here are my two experiments:

1:

VPW -i USTARTUP.ORG

(Oops, webboard either garbles up my spacing or my underscore.)

This opening command, loaded my personal menus,
as specified in my USTARTUP.VDM file.


2:

VPW -i USTARTUP_ORG.VDM

This opening command, did not load my personal menus.
I assumed that this was the distribution version of Vedit.

I also assumed that I would have gotten the same result by disabling the USTARTUP configuration parameter. However, I do
not wish to change my configuration parameters! I prefer to use a different Vedit icon for this purpose.

I hope that this makes sense to you.

-peter.

 

Topic: Re: Invoking execfiles. (4 of 6), Read 22 times
Conf: VEDIT Suggestions
From: Christian Ziemski
Date: Friday, July 15, 2005 11:44 AM

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 10:27:00 -0400, Peter Rejto wrote:

>I did open Vedit with the -i(invocation) option and not with
>the -x option as you did.

So you really want that your USTARTUP.ORG is executed *in**place* of
the normal startup.vdm startup macro?????


>Here are my two experiments:
>
>1:
>
>VPW -i USTARTUP.ORG
>
>This opening command, loaded my personal menus,
>as specified in my USTARTUP.VDM file.

??? What now: USTARTUP.ORG or USTARTUP.VDM ?

And you see: it works without the .VDM extension.



>2:
>
>VPW -i USTARTUP_ORG.VDM
>
>This opening command, did not load my personal menus.
>I assumed that this was the distribution version of Vedit.

Yes, and so it doesn't know of your personal menus...

But it's the distribution version of USTARTUP.VDM and should
*complete* the STARTUP.VDM and not *replace* it!

So invoking it with -i is not the right way!


>I also assumed that I would have gotten the same result by disabling the
>USTARTUP configuration parameter. However, I do
>not wish to change my configuration parameters! I prefer to use a different
>Vedit icon for this purpose.
>
>I hope that this makes sense to you.

Sorry, Peter, most times I can't follow you! I simply don't understand
your plans and your experiments. I'm NOT a mathematician like you and
so it's more than difficult to know what you are doing.

It's often like reading in a crystal ball and trying to answer anyway
;-)

Especially in this case: What do you originally planned to do?

Perhaps:
- One icon starting Vedit with your personal configuration
- and another icon with the original VEDIT configuration?

If that's it then I would do it this way:

1. Copy startup.vdm to startupNU.vdm (NU = No Ustartup)
2. edit startupNU.vdm and comment out the call of USTARTUP.VDM
3. Create an icon with "VPW.EXE -I startupNU.vdm"

The only problem: If a new startup.vdm is distributed, you'll have to
do the above again.

Your normal icon still calls Vedit with enabled USTARTUP option.


So, now I spent much time in this and have to stop, sorry.


Christian

 

Topic: Re: Invoking execfiles. (5 of 6), Read 22 times
Conf: VEDIT Suggestions
From: Ted Green
Date: Friday, July 15, 2005 12:16 PM

At 10:27 AM 7/15/2005, you wrote:
>Here are my two experiments:
>
>1:
>
>VPW -i USTARTUP.ORG
>
>(Oops, webboard either garbles up my spacing or my underscore.)
>
>This opening command, loaded my personal menus,
>as specified in my USTARTUP.VDM file.

Sorry, but I would like to discontinue this discussion.
These are extremely non-standard ways of using VEDIT and while Peter certainly is welcome to experiment any way he likes, it is unreasonable to ask for assistance in interpreting the results of these experiments.

Ted.

 

Topic: Invoking execfiles. (6 of 6), Read 19 times
Conf: VEDIT Suggestions
From: Fritz Heberlein
Date: Friday, July 15, 2005 04:57 PM

Peter,

>Here are my two experiments:

>1:

>VPW -i USTARTUP.ORG
>VPW -i USTARTUP_ORG.VDM

>This opening command, loaded my personal menus,
>as specified in my USTARTUP.VDM file.


I was curious and tried to replicated the first experiment. As expected, it didn't load my personal menus, which are, after all, loaded by the Config(U_TOOLS_MENU,4) command. IMHO, this command is deactivated in the ustartup.org that comes with Vedit.

So, both of your experiments should end up in the same result: nothing happens.

BTW -- apparently i have missed one of your previous postings --, why do you want to startup Vedit in such a rather idiosyncratic way? Given the rather complex startup procedure, i.e. loading startup.vdm, ustartup.
vdm, vedit.cfg, nn.syn etc., interfering with it should lead into difficulties sooner or later :)

Regards,

Fritz