Crashing...

a triple, no, endless: o_O for that!

originally posted by Jheriko
Yeah, and just like the holy grail... it will stay fiction.

it seems you're wrong...
[Given, JFASI is working more often w/ AVS than 3 times a year]

mine rarely crashes either, but when it does, its usually catastrophic, or it has a weirdness where it offsets the mouse cursor by one line.

How about writing some kind of ape that forces avs to save frequently to a temporary file? Just needs some dogy UI hacks 😉

I thought about exactly this yesterday!
Would it be possible??

Should not be a major problem to force AVS to save.
The only new thing is the Save-File Dialog Box popping up.

As I am thinking of this, its probably better to have an external agent running that will detect crashes and reload your preset in last state automatically too when AVS is restarted.

The only problems would be a slowdown, depending on the saving rate and it might also be possible that the dialog box is taking some time to get the file information it needs and will force AVS to idle meanwhile. The first thing could be cutomized, but if the latter occurs, this would probably not make sense at all.

but I could live with a short break every 5 minutes.
I simply can't get myself to save frequently, I just forget it. even when I think "now this is cool, almost finished" I don't have the automatic reflex of saving...
so this would really save me a lotta time

[although it can't be denied that many of my good results came when I rebuilt sth deviously after a crash.]

GC

I can tell this auto-save thing is not going to get off the ground...I dare someone to make it!

since AVS is open-source now, why not just rewrite it instead of making yet another ape?

Well, no one keeps you from doing that.
The point is, that it just can't be done in a few moments.

I looked back at the original post. WOW. My AVS never crashes when I do something as simple as change render modes...That's pretty extreme.

Originally posted by ^..^
The point is, that it just can't be done in a few moments.

Not a few moments but should be ready after 2 hours, at least for me as i've the needed routines already done for Hotlist. If I've some time left beside my major projects, I'll give it a shot.
Its really not that much of a big deal, all you need is a timer, and a row of commands to be sent.

No i meant rewriting AVS in order to include autosaving would take quite long.

Why?

Its even easier without the need to hack. Again, all you need is a timer and a call to the save procedure.

But I dont think doing your custom AVS is so good.
One should ask the dev group if one could contribute stuff to the official version instead. Otherwise there'd be a need to rewrite every new release your own, also there'd be finally some progress on AVS developement.

how about rewriting it for better overall stability, obviating the need for "auto-save" or any other band-aid. Yes I know it would take a while, and I certainly am no coder, so am vulnerable on these points to criticism, but don't we already have enough experience with kludges with Windows? What's needed is a master C-programmer to rework the code, and doesn't have a day job 🙂.

Delphi: 👎
Visual Basic: 👎
.NET: 👎

C: 👍
assembler: 👍 👍

I know im probably the odd man out, but i really hate auto-save feature in any program 😠
It's just... just... see! I can't even explain it, because it frustates me so! 🧟

Originally posted by hornet777
how about rewriting it for better overall stability, obviating the need for "auto-save" or any other band-aid. Yes I know it would take a while, and I certainly am no coder, so am vulnerable on these points to criticism, but don't we already have enough experience with kludges with Windows? What's needed is a master C-programmer to rework the code, and doesn't have a day job 🙂.

Delphi: 👎
Visual Basic: 👎
.NET: 👎

C: 👍
assembler: 👍 👍

Writing it in assembler, yea that will make it stable

Originally posted by PAK-9
Writing it in assembler, yea that will make it stable

Why would it? Because it's closer-to-the-root programming, more basic?
[just a question out of interest, no criticism]
Or was it sarcasm...

It was sarcasm

The lower level you program at the less stable the result is likely to be. If you coded AVS in Visual Basic it very rarely fall over (unless you used r33t h3x) but it would be crushingly slow (again, unless you used r33t h3x).

If you coded it completely in assembly it would be excruciatingly difficult to track down any bugs and probably be going over all the time... it would be pretty nippy though.

When its all said and done though, fixing (patching, bodging, whatever you want to call it) the existing AVS to a stable state would make a lot more sense than writing it from scratch... assuming all you want is the same functionality but stable.

And by the way it would take about 5 minutes to add an autosave to AVS if you get the source and have a passing familiarity with C.

Originally posted by PAK-9
fixing [...] the existing AVS to a stable state would make a lot more sense than writing it from scratch... assuming all you want is the same functionality but stable.

So I take it you folks are making 'fridge' to achieve the next level vis program 🙂

yea... 'making'

admittedly, C is probably the best overall compromise, in terms of language

Originally posted by Magic.X

One should ask the dev group if one could contribute stuff to the official version instead.

ROFL


make a fork... otherwise it will never happen :P

and I am SO working on fridge.

maybe with the sourceforge page up, something or someone might be able to make it stable ¬_¬