Full Version: Elephant Repository

Show messages:  1-10  11-30  31-50  51-70  71-90  91-110  …  491-503

I am on PC so maybe I will can send the Repport error! :)

---

On what folder exit must be this Repport error ? (seems it's a multiple repport )

---

Added http://moiscript.weebly.com/node.html
Tips
Use the TAB key for validate numeric imput!
More easy than the Enter Key : automatically goes to the next case!

Some colors Nodes can have several "Start" : Light Green and Violet!
​Same multiple Targets are not allowed!





PS Node Star has no word "Out" !

---

Hi Pilou, it would usually be in your temp folder, from the start menu type %temp% and push enter.

- Michael

---

Alas seems the "special" report when I press it from these particular Nodes gives nothing in this temp folder !...

---

Hi Pilou, does everything go ok if you use "Ignore all" ? The next release will have these warnings (called "Release mode asserts") turned off.

- Michael

---

Yes all is ok when I press "Ignore" all :) but also can totally exit from MOi without any warning! :) (but not total crashe just Moi)

I believe that rude exit happend when in these particular Nodes above for the no native node function "Fillets" has bad range for the volume considered!

---

Added
Tips

The fictitious "radius" of the Circular Array is made by difference of the position of the selected objects and the position of the requested axis! (here XYZ = 0,0,0 and XY = 2,2,0)

---

Will be added of course :)
done! :) http://moiscript.weebly.com/biblio-elephant.html

All ELEPHANT by Max Smirnov is actually based on this Litegraph ! https://github.com/jagenjo/litegraph.js by Jagenjo

We can use it "ON Line" http://tamats.com/projects/litegraph/demo/

Funny it has used an image of me for illustrate its genious tool! :)

https://github.com/jagenjo/litegraph.js/blob/master/imgs/elephant.gif

---

Added

---

Hi Pilou,

Star node DOES have "out", on my computer.
This suggests that something is wrong with your nodeeditor files(?)
Maybe in your language files? sortie?
Maybe copy in a fresh copy of the curves nodes?


- Brian

---

It's inside the English & French original for me!

Maybe I erased something many time ago during translation?

So I will investigate this curious thing! Not vital for the moment! :)

---

Hi Pilou,

I just looked at the Word documentation pictures that I did a few months ago, and
Star DOES NOT have "Out", in those pictures.

So we both had a bad copy of Curves.js nodes back then. I have recently reinstalled, so have "Out" with Star now.

(I used Jame's files.)

- Brian

---

@Bem (I used Jame's files.) Curious also me with its last opus...

Section "Solids" done! (English / French) rest 19 sections to make! :)

http://moiscript.weebly.com/solids.html

---

Pilou & Brian,

I think I can shed some light on the the case of the disappearing OUT label on "star" node.

You may recall that node labels and associated dots were formally greyed out until a wire was attached. I proposed to Max that it would be better I/O labels to be permanently coloured so as to indicate the intended wiring. I further proposed that in doing so, that labelling the output OUT seems redundant.

http://moi3d.com/forum/index.php?webtag=MOI&msg=7713.830

To drive home this point I did a minor alteration to the code of a couple of nodes. (simply removing the OUT label). I was not my intention to infect others with these mutations; I had just forgotten that I'd done it. I do think though, that it is a testament to the lack of labelling necessity that it has taken till now for this issue to arise.

An advantage of removing unnecessary labelling is that it reduces the width of the node. This may sound like a trivial consideration, but when you have a node circuit with dozens of nodes, it can spread to multiple screen widths necessitating a lot of horizontal panning. Nonessential node width exacerbates this problem.

Not only can the node be reduced in width, but also input labels may be increased without increasing width, to better communicate the required input. The letter "C" for count, for example on "interp" & "random" nodes (& maybe others) could be fully labelled. See attached image below.





I have reinstated the labels to "point" & "star" nodes (see image below), posted revised NodeEditor folder to:
http://moi3d.com/forum/index.php?webtag=MOI&msg=9358.1

I would be interested to know what others thought about the need of output labelling.
I think the "knob" node for example demonstrates that labelling in at least some cases (maybe most) is not required.




Max said "I need to think about it." and maybe he needs to be the one to make the final determination. Nevertheless your thoughts would be appreciated.

James
https://www.instagram.com/nodeology/

Image Attachments:
Screen Shot 2019-08-28 at 8.05.gif  Screen Shot 2019-08-28 at 8.28.gif 

---

James, thank you for the clarification.

I'll need to ponder more on these redundant "outs."
-- how to remove "out" from Macros?
-- how to write an auto format routine to organize/arrange nodes?
-- left click info button is good to know.
- Brian

---

Brian,

>> -- how to remove "out" from Macros? <<

Labelling outputs with a letter SPACE gives this result.



However the authors of Macros may prefer to label otherwise.
Ultimately, it is up to them!

<< -- how to write an auto format routine to organize/arrange nodes?>>

Can you explain further what you mean by this?

James
https://www.instagram.com/nodeology/

Image Attachments:
Screen Shot 2019-08-28 at 10.11.gif 

---

@James so a mystery clarified :) (even C for Count is disturbing because some nodes has list of variables C,D,E,F (six as maximum as I seen)

Sorry for come back to this little thing : does exist or not a shortcut for extend / reduce all nodes in the same time ?
Because click one by one is some painful! :)

---

Pilou,

Yes the ability to collapse nodes is a great feature,
however I find that I rarely use it.

If I'm working on a complex node circuit, I find that there
is a lot of iterative adjustments to nodes inputs and at times
wholesale replacements of sequences of nodes , to get the desired result.

In this case, it is necessary to see all connectors and have access to node inputs...
collapsing & expanding nodes are a hinderance to this debugging process.

Also if you are then taking a screen grab of the node wiring setup, to show process
it is important that connection is revealed.

This may come down to personal preference, and perhaps I cannot regain the eye of the
novice user, but it seems self-evident to me the the coloured dot on the right of the node
are the outputs.

Max, if you are reading this, I be interested to know your thoughts

James
https://www.instagram.com/nodeology/


PS I only routinely use node collapsing facility on "clone" nodes because their function is clear
and they quickly make a mess of the circuit with cascading "clone" nodes bifurcating to further "clone" nodes ad infinitum.

The sooner the "clone" node is deprecated, the better.

---

Yes but "reduce" just a part of numerous Nodes can be helpful in case of a big circuit ! :)
(when this part is good working)

Maybe this function is yet existing!
I must explore the doc : https://github.com/jagenjo/litegraph.js

In fact i have never used intensively such prog
but i see that is increasing very speedy as soon as you want make something biggest that a simple 3 nodes! :)

---

Show messages:  1-10  11-30  31-50  51-70  71-90  91-110  …  491-503