Leaderboard

I think your Local $DataFile inside your Create function is overruling your Global.

Hello developer community, before I open a feature request, I wanted to ask for the general opinion on this topic. I like to use the Null-Coalescing operator (??) in my PHP scripts and miss him in Autoit. In addition to the ternary operator (? :), this operator is part of the group of Conditional Assignment Operators. $x = expr1 ?? expr2 The value of $x is expr1 if expr1 exists, and is not NULL. If expr1 does not exist, or is NULL, the value of $x is expr2. With this operator you can, for example, easily assign default values. Do we want the Null-Coalescing Operator in Autoit? What is your opinion on this topic? Thanks in advance Exit

I have a script with 250 MB of fileinstall data, when i compile it the file size reduces to 150 MB, even i select "Lowest" option on AutoIt3Wrapper. I don't want any compression, not "Lowest". reasons compression increases compiling time so much, i don't need compiling and when executable file is created, when i use thirdy party program like WinRAR, 7zip existing compression cause them worse compressing. Because compression softwares does not understand each others algoritm (not always but generally), one software mixes the data blocks and other cannot compress even it would able to. When you use extra compression metod it doesn't work, they overlap, even it may unexpectedly increase file size. It's always best to use only one and best one. For example First 7zip compression, then compiling script with highest compression option 250 MB -> 50 MB -> 51 MB First compiling script with highest compression option, then 7zip compression 250 MB -> 150 MB -> 151 MB If i use the lowest option, the result does not change when other program used. Because compression software cannot do anything anymore. First 7zip compression, then compiling script with lowest compression option 250 MB -> 50 MB -> 51 MB First compiling script with lowest compression option, then 7zip compression 250 MB -> 200 MB -> 201 MB

You can use ResourcesEx UDF instead of FileInstall(). There is _ResourceSaveToFile() and #AutoIt3Wrapper_Res_File_Add=test_1.bin, rt_rcdata, TEST_BIN_1 EDIT: You can even add precompiled resources (instead of #AutoIt3Wrapper_Res_File_Add) So you can precompile your big files by rc.exe (resource compiler) from file.rc to file.res and this compiled res file add to compiled AutoIt's exe by this (I used it for precompiled set of icons): #AutoIt3Wrapper_useupx=n #AutoIt3Wrapper_run_after=ResHacker.exe -add %out%, %out%, ikony.res ,,, #AutoIt3Wrapper_run_after=upx.exe --best --compress-icons=0 "%out%" Compilation of (big) resources to from RC to RES will be done only once, not at each compilation of AU3 source! For your case look at these UPX options to exlude your big resource from UPX's compresion: --compress-resources=0 do not compress any resources at all --keep-resource=list do not compress resources specified by list Here is example with source of my precompiled icons ikony.rc: 201   ICON   "sort_asc.ico" 202   ICON   "sort_desc.ico" 203   ICON   "connect.ico" 204   ICON   "login.ico" 205   ICON   "download.ico" 206   ICON   "upload.ico" 207   ICON   "mkdir.ico" 208   ICON   "rmdir.ico" 209   ICON   "rename.ico" 210   ICON   "delete.ico" 211   ICON   "chmod.ico" 212   ICON   "none.ico" 213   ICON   "warning.ico" 214   ICON   "tl-smazat.ico" EDIT2: Here is link to my old topic where I posted attachment Resource compiler (RC52.zip)

No need to be sorry.

Correct... the #pragma option has been implemented much later than the similar #AutoIt3Wrapper options, so there are now both available and I will leave the #AutoIt3Wrapper one in there for easy and backward compatibility. Jos

I would immediately move to another security researcher. The wording he uses to describe the security issues is extremely unprofessional. I would expect a professional and detailed description of the security problems A score for each issue based on a recognized rating scale Links to the security recommandations he refers to ("Microsoft's security recommendations for the safe loading of DLLs and applications") detailed measures to address these security issues In my opinion this "security check and report" is Schrott. BTW: I work in IT-security, so I know what I'm talking about

To automate the latest versions of Browsers use the WebDriver UDF (written by Danp2). There are still a lot of users with a need to use older versions of the IE. So I think the IE UDF will be here for quite some time.