Renumer the Index Numbers?

[yaqwa]

Just a small Question - When i open MXP i see all my build Macros and in the first row there are the index Numbers 1,3,6,9, and so on.

The Numers who are not there are those i deleted in the years i used ME.

So is there any chance to sort the indexnumers and fill the lost numbers? so my last number is the real number of all existing macros (maybe 234 instead of 578)

 

i hope you know what i mean

[terrypin]

Just a small Question - When i open MXP i see all my build Macros and in the first row there are the index Numbers 1,3,6,9, and so on.

The Numers who are not there are those i deleted in the years i used ME.

So is there any chance to sort the indexnumers and fill the lost numbers? so my last number is the real number of all existing macros (maybe 234 instead of 578)

 

i hope you know what i mean

 

Yes, I agree. For quite a while I thought the last number was the total macros, but then I noticed the many gaps.

 

--

Terry, East Grinstead, UK

[stan]

Macro Express Pro treats the macros more like database. Each macro is assigned an index number, which the program uses for a number of routines to quickly locate the correct macro.

 

When you create a new macro, it should fill in the next available hole in the index numbering. But there is not a way to do what you want, other than exporting all your macros to a new file and work from the new file. The new file index should show no gaps in the numbers, until you start deleting more macros than you create.

[terrypin]

Macro Express Pro treats the macros more like database. Each macro is assigned an index number, which the program uses for a number of routines to quickly locate the correct macro.

 

When you create a new macro, it should fill in the next available hole in the index numbering. But there is not a way to do what you want, other than exporting all your macros to a new file and work from the new file. The new file index should show no gaps in the numbers, until you start deleting more macros than you create.

 

Thanks Stan, that's cleaned things up nicely.

 

--

Terry, East Grinstead, UK

[yaqwa]

Thanks - i understand - but for that i really do not understand the need of this display. Would it be not better to show a row of the number of the real macros i have - this will be more interesting for me than to know what index number i now have.

 

BTW. if we speak about that - any chance to hide some of the rows (like index number) in the right field?

[terrypin]

Thanks - i understand - but for that i really do not understand the need of this display. Would it be not better to show a row of the number of the real macros i have - this will be more interesting for me than to know what index number i now have.

 

BTW. if we speak about that - any chance to hide some of the rows (like index number) in the right field?

 

I'm with yaqwa on those points also. It seems that Index is useful only for ISS programmers, not the end user? So I'd like to use its space for making other columns wider.

 

Couldn't the File menu have a Properties or Information item, which would include the current total number of macros it contains?

 

But my main gripe: how about a reliable Modified column!

 

Stan: I'm disappointed to find that after following your suggestion about exporting to a newly-named MEX file to get rid of all those missing index numbers, I've lost the Modified date on all my 550 macros. They are all now identical. I use that field a lot to quickly show me the most recent macros I've worked on. (Particularly as 'Last Run Time' never seems to be reliable, mostly showing Never! What definition of 'run' do you use please?) Anyway, I therefore reckon I'll now restore a backup of the old MEX and live with its meaningless index numbers.

 

--

Terry, East Grinstead, UK

[acantor]

Stan: I'm disappointed to find that after following your suggestion about exporting to a newly-named MEX file to get rid of all those missing index numbers, I've lost the Modified date on all my 550 macros. They are all now identical. I use that field a lot to quickly show me the most recent macros I've worked on. (Particularly as 'Last Run Time' never seems to be reliable, mostly showing Never! What definition of 'run' do you use please?) Anyway, I therefore reckon I'll now restore a backup of the old MEX and live with its meaningless index numbers.

 

I find that the "Last Run Time" is reliable, and it is one of the features I especially appreciate about this version of Macro Express.

 

There are issues, however, with the Explorer screen after running a macro. It is not always up-to-date. Sometimes, the same macro is listed twice. Pressing the up and down arrow keys a few times complete the screen update, but it would be better if the Explorer screen automatically refreshed itself every time a macro is triggered.

[terrypin]

I find that the "Last Run Time" is reliable, and it is one of the features I especially appreciate about this version of Macro Express.

 

There are issues, however, with the Explorer screen after running a macro. It is not always up-to-date. Sometimes, the same macro is listed twice. Pressing the up and down arrow keys a few times complete the screen update, but it would be better if the Explorer screen automatically refreshed itself every time a macro is triggered.

 

Thanks. I think there are two things going on here.

 

1. As you say, ME Pro Explorer doesn't automatically refresh after running a macro. In fact, the only way I can get it to show a change in Last Run Time is to close it and reopen.

 

2. Like Modified, regrettably all values are lost if the macro file is changed/renamed. That must explain why most of mine show 'Never'. I see the earliest date shown is only about a week ago, so I must have changed my MEX file then. I think ME Pro should keep Modified and Last Run intact, just as it keeps the macro name, activation, script, etc.

 

--

Terry, East Grinstead, UK