Request: Rule for RegWrite having Parameter

I have not test this with PEBakery yet, I feel it should work correct.
 Here is test plugin (to be observed by Utils\RegEdit)

Code: [Select]

[Variables]
%hash%=#

[Process]
Run,%ScriptFile%,Test

[Test]
RegHiveLoad,Tmp_System,%RegSystem%
RegWrite,HKLM,0x1,Tmp_System\ControlSet001\Control\CriticalDeviceDatabase\1394%hash%609E&10483,ClassGUID,{d48179be-ec20-11d1-b6b8-00c04fa372a7}
RegWrite,HKLM,0x1,Tmp_System\ControlSet001\Control\CriticalDeviceDatabase\1394%hash%609E&10483,Service,sbp2port
RegHiveUnLoad,Tmp_System

*
Story Behind:
There are some registry keys that have #
Which can be mixed by builder IF parameter support added to RegWrite.

*** I like to see RegWrite only support variables without parameter support. ***

Above %hash% trick by Galapo added to relevant plugins in the past, but cause another hurricane.
(ex: recent help document hurricane )
Other than hurricanes, we had to update plugins each time things change.
Gena write most of the registry via plugins
SE writes most of the registry with ready .reg files to suffer from wb things we experienced with Gena.
(+ Reg Copy)

I hope with PEBakery setting a Documented rule with RegWrite on this subject will end any related hurricane on this area.

Which can be mixed by builder IF parameter support added to RegWrite.

Parameters ARE currently supported (just like wb), so this issue will persist unless it is removed by ied206.

I would not object to removing parameter support from registry keys. It could always be worked around by those who would wish to use them by:

Code: [Select]

[Test]
Set,%param1%,#6
RegHiveLoad,Tmp_System,%RegSystem%
....

On another note, perhaps it would be a good idea to look at alternatives to the current parameter names, in order to mitigate other issues that may occur in other commands.
these could be aliased so the new names could be used going foward but not break backwards compatibility during the transition. something to think about.

#$#1, #$#2, etc.
or
#$1, #$2, etc.

In the meantime I will update the RegWrite documentation to discourage the use of parameters in RegWrite.

Which can be mixed by builder IF parameter support added to RegWrite.

Parameters ARE currently supported (just like wb), so this issue will persist unless it is removed by ied206.

which wb !
behaviour changes and parameters NEVER used on plugins since 7 years now.
All workarounded with .reg files etc. etc.

If PEBakery have such thing, it is a design mistake, reported on current topic.

Why do you think it was rather easier to create PEBakery build Win10PESE nicely.
 Win10PESE starting with JFX follow experience we had with Gena and never trust wb syntax on such things.

Proof:
I am still updating Gena to support PEBakery ......

I would not object to removing parameter support from registry keys. It could always be worked around by those who would wish to use them by:

No thanks.
I am very sure I am much more aware troubles you invite by updating ~ more than thousand of plugins for years now,
including fixes and fixes and fixes through wb versions.
This is the last time I wish I am doing same for PEBakery after 7 years, only to get rid of wb and shitlanders.

In the meantime I will update the RegWrite documentation to discourage the use of parameters in RegWrite.

Wow, you are in contact to MS and Commercial softwares not to use such registry keys.
Hmmmm, I remember similar cases that caused troubles on plugins by same shitland attitude.




**
Homes32,
I am sure you will vanish another 7 years after a while,
 With your name on help documents ignoring how things goes.
 (Recent Example: Unlike ChrisR http://theoven.org/index.php?topic=2366.msg25525#msg25525
    and Nikzzzz http://theoven.org/index.php?topic=93.msg25542#msg25542
     and JFX and Galapo always around )

 we will be cleaning the mess this time you create,
   including documentation and syntax fixes.

Why do you think I could not convince JFX touch wb and related syntax again.
Think about it if you can. (no hope, since 7 years nothing changed on your views.)

I only hope ied206 do not follow JFX after the mess you are creating.
 It is really sad you create such messs.
   It already start causing circles... ( -> And my predictions always true so far since 8 years self-proven by passing time.)

**
While writing current post,
I already get notification https://github.com/ied206/PEBakery/pull/30
I am very sure we will need to rewrite and check all help document in following 7 years IF we can have ied206 around.

But first things first, I focus on getting rid of wb.

Thanks Homes32 (sarcasm)

I wish you were working on wb and its help documents on shitland on last 7 years where you can access source codes of wb and improve the way you like with the project you write.
 Maybe (to me impossible, prove me I am wrong) you could update wb to support all related projects.
  Not too late......
  Sigh ...



@ied206

I am sure my request is clear.

you make me laugh. 

first you complain that there is no documentation for PEBakery and say documentation should be priority #1
then someone actually writes documentation for PEBakery
then you complain that there is behavior in PEBakery caused by design flaws and request that is documented.
someone updates the documentation to included mention of the design flaws so others don't have the same troubles
then you insult that person for doing what you asked and were unwilling to do yourself? You obviously haven't bothered to actually read any of the Manual have you?

If you have anything positive to say I welcome your feedback, otherwise save your insults and bitterness for "Other World"

Have Fun Homes32.

You can not read and understand, but you can write help document !

You create a help document on a request not responded yet.
It is no surprise wb help document side by side with wb also failed for same and more reasons.

You are only another individual that can not see the consequence of your actions, even written clearly on current and other topics.
Passing years does not give some lessons to you.
And as such individuals like you always do, continue accept current post with insults and bitterness from your self centered point of view.


I only wish ied206 do not follow same path with wb, which already started with you.

Chances going more down to convince JFX.
And my idea of batch builder going much more down.
--> for the ones who can see. (Do not worry, there are less than 10 people I alreadyy know who watch current topics and see what is really going on, you are not one of them)

I feel in the end of the day, after PEBakery make a year around, we will be able to get rid of wb next year with circle you create,
only IF ied206 be around next year.

Brrrrr Homes32. Continue creating help documents like you create for wb.
 It will either cause a year delay, or ashes to ashes, up to ied206 future decisions.

Anyway about current topic, if following Homes32:
- help documents not reliable only useful to understand basics with warning "do not use unless used inside projects" (same with wb help documents)
- it seems workaround to syntax bugs will continue the same path with wb workarounds.


Thanks Homes32 for your nice contributions. (sarcasm)
Continue this way. (sarcasm)