Oh lawl, a problem with Vista and AvsP

[Panky]

There are no extra hoops. But no, that is not what I am saying. What I AM saying is that if AvsP breaks, instead of spending a week fixing it and then asking on a forum only to be told "delete file x" people should just use something else in the meantime. AvsP not working is no reason to not keep working, avs script files are plaintext and pretty much anything can read them, even MS Word. Not having access to AvsP is hardly a reason to not use avisynth. I have no clue where people got the insanely retarded idea that AvsP is an avisynth GUI and that it is required, but I would assume it has to do with that terrible avtech guide.

I believe I said something like that AvsP is kind of a GUI between what would be avisynth and a text editor before. And I think I wouldn't be all that mistaken, or have you seen that many text editors for editing/autocompleting avisynth uses (without further set up) and that include preview screens? The fact that it's a GUI (or not) doesn't necessarily mean that it will build up all the script itself, but that will graphically help the user more than writing in a common text editor.

I doubt there are many people that assume that this program is the only way around Avisynth, but most flee at the thought of writing their own lines of code, and this seems much better than plain text. The thought that AvsP is required is wrong, not retarded. Get off the horse a little bit.

[Mister Hatt]

Almost all major text editors I have seen for windows, and even a few POSIX ones, have avisynth syntax highlighting, and several have better completion than AvsP. The preview window would be good if it was both frame accurate and didn't introduce random cockups in colour or even worse visual distortions. I think the biggest AvsP issue I see on d9 and elsewhere is "it looks fine in AvsP but it is broken in vdub and my encode" or sometimes the opposite. AvsP just seems to have more problems than negating useful features.

You'd be surprised how many nubs think it is. It's because they don't know what avisynth is properly, and none of the guides explain it very well at all.

[BasharOfTheAges]

You'd be surprised how many nubs think it is. It's because they don't know what avisynth is properly, and none of the guides explain it very well at all.

Whether correct or not from a logical perspective, the guides are written, in regards to avisynth at least, in a way that assumes the majority of users are terrified of learning anything and their brains will shut down from a spike of cognitive dissonance if they're forced to think about anything scripting related in a step-wise logical manner. Sadly, the fact that people keep complaining that they're "too hard to understand" means it's only going to get worse. Write it succinctly and you go over their heads, write it all out in a simple.wiki form and you're going to have guides that are 50 pages of text that all the lazy children will refuse to read.

It's really about the conflicting purposes these guides serve - teaching tool and reference manual. Something more technical would appeal to those with understanding, patience, and a desire to learn - qualities that are severely lacking in the noobs we tell to R.EADFAG(LOLZ). Something less technical but all-encompassing would piss everyone off with its bulk and most likely wouldn't be read by any real portion of our local population.