Update docs for PT Run: Start apps with parameter (Program plugin)

[htcfreek]

How to start apps with parameters via program plugin.

The following things should work:

• app -param ...
• app /param ...
• app --parameter ...
• app -- parameter ... (Here -- is used as delimiter by PT Run.)

[dedavis6797]

@htcfreek for clarity, would this be an example of what I'd type for an executable "myProgram.exe" with three parameter values val1, val2, val3:
.myProgram.exe -param val1 val2 val3

[htcfreek]

@htcfreek for clarity, would this be an example of what I'd type for an executable "myProgram.exe" with three parameter values val1, val2, val3:
.myProgram.exe -param val1 val2 val3

This has something to do what .myProgram.exe expects. But the point is that PT Run sais everything after -parameter and -parameter is the parameter. So in your example you enter 4 parameters.

• .myProgram.exe -param val1 val2 val3 = myProgram.exe and -param val1 val2 val3
• .myProgram.exe /param val1 val2 val3 = myProgram.exe and /param val1 val2 val3
• .myProgram.exe --param val1 val2 val3 = myProgram.exe and --param val1 val2 val3
• .myProgram.exe -- param val1 val2 val3 = myProgram.exe and param val1 val2 val3

Exampel
cmd.exe /c echo test (Same behavior as Win+R prompt.)
cmd.exe -- /c echo test

Important note
Inputs like Mozilla Firefox -- www.google.de or Firefox -- www.google.de or edge --inprivate should also work. You don't have to type the exe name. App name works too.

[htcfreek]

Btw: .myprogramm.exe won't work because you get no results searching for exe name. (Except for special apps like cmd or explorer.)

@crutkas
Is this a bug or wanted?

[crutkas]

Lets take a step back, I couldn't find a .33 PR that enabled this style behavior. More so for .. What they are clearly asking for is for > style behavior to be smarter and allow for additional params to be passed in.

. is for app name. example, .visual studio, not exe. Example below is not a valid command for app name

[htcfreek]

Lets take a step back, I couldn't find a .33 PR that enabled this style behavior. More so for .. What they are clearly asking for is for > style behavior to be smarter and allow for additional params to be passed in.

. is for app name. example, .visual studio, not exe. Example below is not a valid command for app name

But why is .cmd.exe /k echo test or .explorer.exe working then and what is the difference of these commands to firefox.exe or msedge.exe?

[dedavis6797]

Docs have been updated, we had to use explicit examples because app -param ... and the rest caused too much ambiguity on the proper usage of this feature. To clarify expectations on the .exe behavior, I've opened issue #10210 for further discussion/planning.

[htcfreek]

Lets take a step back, I couldn't find a .33 PR that enabled this style behavior. More so for .. What they are clearly asking for is for > style behavior to be smarter and allow for additional params to be passed in.

@crutkas
The PR that introduce the commandline feature is #5791.

[htcfreek]

Docs have been updated, we had to use explicit examples because app -param ... and the rest caused too much ambiguity on the proper usage of this feature. To clarify expectations on the .exe behavior, I've opened issue #10210 for further discussion/planning.

@dedavis6797
For the examples you can look at the tests in PR #5791.

[htcfreek]

Docs have been updated, we had to use explicit examples because app -param ... and the rest caused too much ambiguity on the proper usage of this feature. To clarify expectations on the .exe behavior, I've opened issue #10210 for further discussion/planning.

@dedavis6797
For the examples you can look at the tests in PR #5791.

@dedavis6797
Do you rework the examples in docs later if #10210 is done?

[dedavis6797]

@dedavis6797
Do you rework the examples in docs later if #10210 is done?

Yes that is the expectation.