also. there is a problem with ‘Extract Parameter’ and Undo… if i extract parameter then undo (cmmd-Z), it won’t undo… whatever was done prior to extracting is what is undone.
[edit] - that said, i guess i can imagine scenarios where this may be desired… i don’t have enough GH experience yet to know what’s best.
So, you have set the value of A to -0.5 * Pi…not an expression. I would not expect the display name of the component to change when you extract it as a parameter unless you rename A to something different.
[quote=“dan, post:2, topic:28462, full:true”]
So, you have set the value of A to -0.5 * Pi…not an expression. I would not expect the display name of the component to change when you extract it as a parameter unless you rename A to something different.[/quote]
i guess it’s just that i haven’t come across a use for it yet… i’ve used the option but i always have to edit it to tell me the info.
if i extract parameter of, say, Range’s N value, all it does is show me another N next to the original N… so in that regard, i don’t see the use as it’s not telling me anything new or displaying info in a very different way.
in the case of Range’s N, i’d more expect to see ‘10’ being displayed (the default value) or another value if i’ve entered one… because it’s then showing me hidden information… or info that’s otherwise only temporarily available if i hover the cursor over the value.
that said, this isn’t a big deal at all to me… i’m just being curious.
i’d much prefer to not waste anyone’s time regarding this which could be much better spent on other areas of GH for mac.
yeah, i think i see this one as more beneficial than it being included in the undo stack… it was just unexpected behavior at first but now that i know about it, it’s ok.
The ‘Extract Parameter’ option might be useful, for example, if you decide to share that parameter with other components. The behavior in GH1 is exactly what you see, though perhaps what you mention about the resulting component actually showing you the value might be a good suggestion for GH2. I could see it fitting it nicely actually in the component display overrides. If you right click in the center of a component, you will see this little paint bucket. If you click it, it will go through the different display options. This way, one can override the globel icons vs text display of the icons on a component basis.
Another option could be to add a ‘value’ option to display the value.
It only makes sense for data that have a good (and short) text representation, introducing an inconsistency between -say- integer data and brep data.
It only makes sense for parameters which contain one (or at most a very limited number of) data items, introducing another inconsistency.
It would make extracted parameters differ from ones that were created through other means, introducing a third inconsistency.
The name now needs to be tied to the value(s) inside the parameter, thus changing the values would change the name, possibly requiring the parameter to resize itself to accommodate the new name.
I could see it fitting it nicely actually in the component display overrides.
The display overrides are actually something I was hoping to get rid off entirely, be it for fancy wires, full names, or icon/name. There really is no good reason to not have fancy wires, full name display has caused no end of problems, and it should be easier to find the type and name and values of parameters without toggling states or connecting objects to them. I’m not exactly sure what solutions will work, but the current ones don’t.
thanks for the rundown David.
i understand what you’re saying there and yes, agree this type of option would lead to a more confusing experience.
related but not really-
is it possible to make customized components and whatnot…
and by customized, i just mean ,say, a panel which is preshrunk to its smallest size and maybe of a different color/font than default… which could be assigned to a keystroke (or some other form of shortcut)…
so i’d get the normal/default panel when calling on it in the normal ways… but if i did the shortcut, i’d get a secondary/customized version of a panel?
Most shortcuts on the Mac side of things will be implemented soon, but there are a few that go against Mac interface concepts. Here is an item where we are discussing this: http://mcneel.myjetbrains.com/youtrack/issue/MR-2466
