Procedure checkcolor
LoadRGB $mouse
IF {RGBRed} = 167 and {RGBGreen} = 255 and {RGBBlue} = 255
delay 1000
LeftClick
Stop
end
loop 10000
delay 600000
loop 2
MousePos 279, 752
delay 500
leftclick
delay 500
MousePos 762, 140
delay 500
call checkcolor
MousePos 396, 749
delay 500
leftclick
delay 500
MousePos 810, 171
call checkcolor
MousePos 496, 757
delay 500
leftclick
delay 500
MousePos 862, 198
call checkcolor
MousePos 592, 761
delay 500
leftclick
delay 500
MousePos 909, 224
call checkcolor
MousePos 682, 757
delay 500
leftclick
delay 500
MousePos 960, 256
call checkcolor
End
end

it come out error,"could not find an END statement for all procedure",how to solve it?
how to setting the "alt + ~" (it is combined hotkey)
if got any other better method of coding please tell me too...newbie in the stage of learning..

Use indentation to identify structures.

If you don't know how this is done, look on the "Editor" menu, and click, "Beautify Macro".

Doing that on your procedure produces:

...which clearly shows you are one "end" short of a set. I'm not going to look too closely at it, but on a cursory glance, I think you just need to add one more "end" at the bottom.

-Triane

erm,it happen the same question back to the topic,
"could not find an END statement for all procedure"

i tried to put "end" (2 or three of "end" apply),but it still like that.
//spelling mistake,i change from "tree" to "three"...pressed too fast and i always ignore the red line under the words)

also the second question, how to set the macro in game key in the (combined hotkey) "alt + ~", "alt + a" (it is combined hotkey in game)???

Now do you see what I said about these forums Triane?

rofl -- indeed, although it doesn't seem that much more eggregious than many of the questions Ipa used to upbraid so eloquently -- perhaps it's just a lack of quality posts to dilute the stream that makes it seem worse


Did you take my suggestion of running the "Beautify Macro" routine? If you did, it should, by virtue of the indentation, show pretty clearly where your missing "end" statement(s) are. Given the one procedure you illustrated, I'd surmise that perhaps you've been leaving "end" statements off of each of your procedures, thereby potentially leaving you many "ends" short over the entire script. Indentation and formatting your code is more than just making it beautiful, it's an aid against problems of this exact nature!

-Triane

Edit: OMG -- rofl, I just actually looked at that code, it's a disaster! (hint: unintended recursion is a very bad thing!) Nevertheless, assuming that you, in fact, want to put an "end" statement before the "loop 10000" line, it would eliminate some significant problems... also: is "loop 10000" really the way you want to contain the main portion of your program? given that the first thing it does is wait 10 minutes, I would assume "while 1=1" would work just as well, and not run the risk of expiring (although I WOULD be surprised if that code ran successfully for 100k minutes without SOMETHING crashing...)

huh,
thanks...but still blur at a lot of points....
does it is because of my "Procedure" line 1 to line 7 got the problem?

for i admit i doesn't try on beautiful macro...but i just tried a stupid step....



the error still "could not find an END statement for all procedure".
after i tried cutting the last line (end), another error occur "you are missing at least on end statement"

haha,it is funny.
can give me some 1-2 example (right) for me to settle the error?
erm,enjoying solute the error now,just like to find out the true of a mystery.

First things first, and this is before anyone attempts to help you with your "END" statement problem, and that is you have to get rid of that recursion bug. I saw it and Triane finally saw it and I will tell you that you had better see it or your program is doomed to utter failure and the lack of a closing "END" statement is the least of your worries.

Do you happen to know what recursion is?

Actually, that was my first knee-jerk response too (as indicated by my post), but afterwards I realised that if you look at the code between the "loop 10000" and its associated "end" statement as the "mainline" of the program, and the procedure as being only the code up to the "loop 10000" statement, then there isn't a recursion bug, and I suspect that's where the missing "end" should be placed...

Adding additional "end" statements to the bottom of the macro results in the recursion bug, and that's why (I think) he's getting errors that aren't indicating the actual problem clearly when he tries that.

i.e. this is what I think he intended:
...personally, I think it should be something like:

I have a suspicion though, that this isn't the entirety of the code, in which case what I've put in the "mainline" segment here, probably needs to be proceduralized...

-Triane

I have no idea what he wanted in his code since it wasn't even beautified (Ipa, used to kick all asses over that) but I do know this the code you wrote is way way way above his competency level so he will have no idea how to handle it or what it is even doing. He will probably treat it like black voodoo magic and simply C&P it.

LoL -- given what I've seen, it's pretty hard to argue with your expectations

-Triane

Looking at the New Complex code for the state of Arguing
Once the Results = False there's no statement to ever make it true again, the macro would End.

I think he wrote it, and judging by what he mentioned, based on more code that was not put up so it is unknown to us. Based on the rule of logic that code, that we never saw, should have somewhere in it a state checking and setting routine/routines but that is just a wild ass guess on my part.

From the original code cleaned up as per my stated expectations:


Once the "IF" test passed, the macro would execute the "Stop" instruction, thereby ending the macro, albeit messily (I generally hate "STOP" type logic). Using only the code [we] were given, my method accomplishes the same net result, but avoids using messy code-abortions like "Stop"...

-Triane