Hello,
Two topics there.
First controls in patches/racks and IB.
In my opinion, it is unsolvable unless creating GUI setup for patch and GUI setup for IB. This option is not relevant, you can imagine.
I can understand that you want to control a param from both side. Why don't you use two controls, one in the patch, the other in IB with in and out connected thru pass if change ? Much simple to deal with.
Cabling issues in sub-patch. There's no bug there. Inlet/outlet are referenced by name. If you change names, Usine can't recognize the input/output. We have two solutions then. Cabling the wire somewhere or erase the wire. The first solution is more efficient. You can see you have an issue. Otherwise not. For complex patch, you can have dozen of wires coming from everywhere and you will loose something if your wire is unplugged.
Sylvain
Hello Sylvain,
You're right, there are two topics, and, in my opinion, two problems:
1) I understand that it's not relevant to create different GUI setups (one for the control panel, one for the IB), but since Usine let the user the ability to resize, reposition and "repercent" the modules for the IB only, it should work as intended. At the moment, there are sometimes GUI bugs, where an item suddenly appears at the bottom right (for example) of the control panel because we changed its size or position from the IB. Someday, Olivier told me to avoid using the "always visible" feature with different size/position. But it's a pity. I could create different modules, as you suggest. This is great for a knob, or simple controls. But if you look at my patch, it would force me to create 9 new listboxes just because the "items font size factor" is the same between the control panel and the IB (but also because of the GUI problem mentioned above).
2) There are three ideas. First, it would be nice to let the user decide what happens when an input/output is removed/renamed from a subpatch (disconnect the modules that went to the subpatch removed inlet/outlet, or let the cable appear to tell the user it has to be reconnected). Both options are great in my opinion. Second, you said that cabling the wire somewhere is more efficient, but it would be clearer to the user if the cable then appear as dots, or with another colour. Whatever but not just as it is now. Furthermore, sometimes the wire is cabled on another inlet, which leads to an unwanted behaviour most of the time. Third, when dealing with the subpatch inputs/outputs there is clearly an intended behaviour with subpatch views (from totally collapsed to completely unfold). It sometimes changes whereas it's not decided by the user, and there are also cables that look disconnected whereas they are not (there is an inconsistent and useless hybrid view, that often replaces the current view, see pic).
Thanks,
creal.
Statistics: Posted by creal — 09 Dec 2022, 13:45
]]>