Picrel are the reasons why I think I'll keep using Windows forever (If AHK was available on mac I'd consider switching).
Picrel are the reasons why I think I'll keep using Windows forever (If AHK was available on mac I'd consider switching).
Picrel are the reasons why I think I'll keep using Windows forever (If AHK was available on mac I'd consider switching).
What do you do with autohotkey? I've never used it
automating certain software which doesn't support scripting. I just set the mouse to click where I will have to click manually.
Windows-gays make fun of Linux-gays for using command line tools then turn around and do GUI-based automation/scripting.
simple use is remap keys, custom keybinding combos, and inputting strings automatically. then the sky becomes the limit, people made full on gui programs with it, that's how fast and flexible it is.
honestly i'm surprise linux doesn't have anything that comes close to it.
xdotool and xbindkeys. Almost everything is exposed by the file system on linux so there is no need for autohotkey which is mostly a wrapper for the windows api. On linux you have kernel usespace which is all accessible via shell scripting, and x or wayland which both have tools. If you want a full acripting replacement, there are libraries for ruby and python that let you do it all from one file like autohotkey
does linux allow you to intercept all keys globally? maybe even scan the screen for certain patterns to do certain things?
i think the neat thing about AHK is that it has everything you'd need under one lightweight package, achieving most things is very straightforward and frictionless. it can even compile scripts to a single small binary. python can do a lot, but it's neither lightweight nor straightforward.
>scan the screen for certain patterns to do certain things
I never used this with AHK, I wonder if it's reliable
Reliable as you want it to be. The tools are there.
You can intercept all input at the kernel level, but it's more commonly done via Xorg. You can't with most wayland compisitors so in those cases you just read the keyboard input with something like the "interception tools" package.
Reading the screen can be done via tons of different tools depending on the purpose, again with caveats on certain wayland compositors.
I don't see the point of compiling a script like this, since most of the time all you're doing is putting the interpreter into an executable that includes the script, so theres no performance boost. I don't know about that one. If i was going to compile an autohotkey-like program on Linux I'd probably use some sort of lisp as the language.
Other recommendations in the thread might be closer to autohotkey. I'm mostly suggesting how to do it the "linux way" because its easier in the long run. You can put everything in a bash script that checks if xdotool and xbindkey exist, then install them if necessary and run them afterward. I think compiling doesnt make sense, but i do know that with ruby, you can use jruby and create a jar file. There arent going to be real ways to convert those types of languages to static cose though.
>You can't with most wayland compisitors
why is it different? what's the incentive for it to be different?
>I don't see the point of compiling a script like this
it's portable, i tend to use my scripts for work without installing AHK and having to explain what it does, i tend to jump on random machines too so portability helps. It's also easier to send it to my non tech savvy friends and impress them. AHK is literally the equivalent of knowing advanced excel in normie world.
so you like it because you can use it on machines where you don't control the OS. completely unrelated to your personal machine like you said in the OP.
>why is it different? what's the incentive for it to be different?
incredibly deranged takes on security
it's one of wayland's biggest problems
most of their hypothetical scenarios require "getting past the airtight hatchway" i.e. already having compromised the machine anyways
they design the protocol like it's remote when that should be secondary or even tertiary to the initial protocol
Every OS has one or more tools that can do what AHK does, without AHK's god awful BASIC language.
>Every OS has one or more tools
Name them.
Hammerspoon (for macgays), Autokey, hawck, off the tip of my tongue. Plus a lot of what AHK is used for can be done natively in most Linux WMs/DEs.
It blows my mind that autohotkey is more popular than autoit3.
same here
and with Wayland linux is even more fricked and useless
>AHK
just use applelscript if you're that autistic
this. wintards think if there's no gui app for something then it's impossible
>lintroons think if they use cli programs for something then they are intelligent
>pajeet toys
>autobotnet
too much neetslop, now your brain is fried
>Picrel are the reasons
are both grossly obsolete since the introduction of Large-Action Models
https://blog.salesforceairesearch.com/large-action-models/
I know the average g tard is a IQfy tourist imposter who only plays games and watches porn but you need to keep up with genuine tech improvements. If you're going to automate tasks, use LAMs and you will blow the frick out out of your competition
redpill me on LAMs then
>redpill me on LAMs then
finally someone who wants to listen
I'll quote from the salesforce article I linked before
> Just as LLMs made it possible to automate the generation of text, and, in their multi-modal forms, a wide range of media, LAMs may soon make it possible to automate entire processes. And because they’re naturally fluent in language, they’ll intelligently interact with the world—communicating with people, adapting as circumstances change, and even interacting with other LAMs.
this is literaly the biggest game changer and no one here seems to give a shit
here's an example of a company using LAMs, in their Rabbit R1.
and here's an example of a FOSS LAM
https://github.com/lavague-ai/LaVague
read the salesforce article I posted, it really explains it in a moron friendly way without technical jargon but BASICALLY
it's a large language model that can do actions, it can use the computer just like you can. If you can do something on a computer, a LAM can be trained to do the same thing by learning from hundreds of interfaces interactions and so on