>I used to write my web pages in HTML, and wrote them all in Wordpad; things have improved since then, and I'm lazier than I used to be. The Fox compiler in version 6 was much simpler; it's always been my experience that cut & paste lends itself to too
many mistakes.

Just as long as you don't get any expectations that Inno will ever be a click & point shooter. The one-time wizard is about all you get, and that didn't improve - frankly, I don't remember that anyone ever asked for it.

>You seem to want complete control over the compile process. I just want it to compile, and save my brain cells for programming in VFP. ;-)

I do, because I've been through the opposite (no control) with IS and earned a few more whites in my beard with it.

>I apologize for ranting.

So do I. I was actually scared that Inno would get a graphical shell (though, we could write one if we really wanted to, using tools like depends.exe to make our exe confess to what is it actually using) if enough people asked for it, and lose the lean and mean simple approach. I've seen that happen to many tools I once loved to use (written by Central Point and Peter Norton and Quarterdeck - remember them?).

> Inno is fine, and it's probably what I'm going with, but missing the library files (and not having anything in the standard interface to remind me) has caused some delay in production and some wasted effort, and after having set it up with a menu, it then required me to use a different method to edit. That was the gist of my earlier complaint.

That's because you didn't ask here first - or took the samples from the Wiki. I cheated - went straight for the Wiki and took my scripts from there.

>>I still think it's easier to scroll down a few lines and
>>insert one more line - we all have these reflexes already,
>>the eye-mouse-keyboard coordination is fine in a text -
>
>Again, you make assumptions on how easy or difficult it is for everyone to use standard keyboards

Guilty as charged... come to think of it, I've had colleagues watching me while I worked. As in "just wanted to see if I can follow... can't". And that's from someone from my class (both high school and college).

, but it's actually a matter of preference, and I prefer saving the creative juices for other endeavors. Compiling is compiling; for me, it should have a few options (what icon to use, where to set up files, what name to call it, etc.), but I don't need a lot.

That's actually the part I love the best about Inno - this is all so simple and clear, no fancy "multipodial terrestrial parser" names for what everybody else calls a rake, layout of sections is simple enough, help IS helpful (surprised to shocked, in that order, I really was).

>>And I've learned Inno in two hours.
>
>Maybe that's the key. I've only worked on Inno for a total of half an hour. Check again when I'm up to your level. :-)

Oh, yes. In the first half an hour I was likewise disappointed that it doesn't automagically include your runtimes and other dependencies - but then, since it doesn't use .msi files, it doesn't bring the whole truck if you want just one wheel. You tell it what, and it builds a lean MyAppSetup.exe in no time, with excellent compression.

And later, the maintenance can be as much as editing the version line somewhere in first section and pressing ctrl+f9. Done in a few minutes.