SimplexNodes missing from editor

Forums General Discussion SimplexNodes missing from editor

This topic contains 5 replies, has 2 voices, and was last updated by  Gavalakis 10 months, 3 weeks ago.

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1639

    Rami
    Participant

    After updating to 2.7 all SimplexNodes no longer show upp in the Node finder (right click).
    All already created SimplexNodes still work and exist within the graph but I can’t create new ones and to reuse the old ones I’m forced to copy and paste them to new graphs. Only FlowControlNodes and reflected nodes are visible.

    EDIT:
    Some SimplexNodes have been moved to Functions/Implemented while some I still can’t find, like ExtractorNodes.
    After the update, the attribute DoNotList was added to ExtractorNode, is there any reason for this? If they are obsolete they should be marked as such.

    Is moving the SimplexNodes back to where they where an easy fix? The category attribute is only appended onto “Functions/Implemented”, I would like it to be as it where.

    #1654

    Gavalakis
    Keymaster

    Hello and happy new year!

    The ‘Extractor’ nodes have indeed been deprecated because in v2.7+, extracting objects can be done for all struct types via reflection and thus the need to create Extractor nodes explicitly for each type is no longer required.
    In v2.7+, you can find the “Extract” node for each type respectively under the type’s category in “Functions/Reflected/[THE TYPE]”.
    (I will mark the Extractor Obsolete in the next version by the way)

    If you were using custom Extractor nodes to achieve something that is not possible through the new reflection based extractor and you would like to still have to possibility to create custom extractor nodes, I can chose no to deprecate it. Just let me know if so.

    Regarding categorization, I would really like to keep all Simplex Nodes under the “Functions/Implemented” category, so that it is very clear even from the UI perspective, what these nodes are, instead of having them mixed up in other categories. Why do you want to change that? 🙂

    Thanks.

    #1656

    Rami
    Participant

    Regarding categorization, I would really like to keep all Simplex Nodes under the “Functions/Implemented” category, so that it is very clear even from the UI perspective, what these nodes are, instead of having them mixed up in other categories. Why do you want to change that?

    The reason is that we have a lot of nodes of a certain type in its own category in root, some of these nodes are Simplex Nodes so the latest version moved them to a different category, making it harder for some users to find them. I would expect that if I use the Category attribute, that is the exact path that would be used.

    #1659

    Gavalakis
    Keymaster

    Hello again,

    I understand, but I am really skeptical of reverting the categories to the way it were before right now. I could though add a boolean optional parameter to the [Category] attribute to denote whether the category is Absolute or Relative. As such all that would be required on your end, would be to do something like [Category(“Rami”, true], to use an absolute path.

    Let me know.
    Thank you.

    #1666

    Rami
    Participant

    I think having the option would be great. It’s difficult to organize the nodes otherwise. We have many custom nodes of different types and rarely use the pre-made nodes and the reflection nodes.

    #1668

    Gavalakis
    Keymaster

    Thanks for the follow up. I will try to squeeze that option within the next version 🙂
    Thank you.

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.