1 Topic by tucan

  • tucan
  • NWare Pioneer
  • Offline
  • From: London
  • Registered: 2007-09-07
  • Posts: 64

Topic: Local Control Flyoffs ....please

Hi,

I usually try and make the systems that I work on modular, and as such split most of the control logic up in to custom control blocks that I can test individually then replicate.

The problem with this is that if I use any flyoffs within the block to make it neater and easier to 'read' then when I duplicate this block then the flyoffs will clash between blocks

It would be very very useful if there was a facility to have local control flyoffs, ie flyoffs whose scope was only within that block,  otherwise they should look and behave like normal control flyoffs. Maybe they should be defined as local when the flyoff name begins with an unusual charcter such as '$' or '%'

Maybe this would be applicable to audio flyoffs as well, but I think that 99% of the need is for local control flyoffs first

This would definately encourage neat programming!

2 Reply by cwa

  • cwa
  • cwa
  • Peavey Technical Director
  • Offline
  • From: Boulder, Colorado USA
  • Registered: 2007-08-13
  • Posts: 193

Re: Local Control Flyoffs ....please

Interesting idea.  One problem I can think of with this is how would one represent this in the flyoffs tree?  Or in the right-click list of flyoffs... Also, when you say local, do you mean only on one page?

3 Reply by tucan

  • tucan
  • NWare Pioneer
  • Offline
  • From: London
  • Registered: 2007-09-07
  • Posts: 64

Re: Local Control Flyoffs ....please

When I said local I was thinking of 'local' being within a block, but can be on any page within that block,  but also NOT within any additional sub blocks, as they would have their own local scope.

They could be represented on the flyoff tree as a seperate predefined category of local flyoffs, and be listed under the name of the blocks that contain them. Of course the whole point is that you may have a nice modular approach and end up with several blocks with the same name, so maybe they shoudl be listed under the unique device ID of the parent block instead.

This approach would also work for the right click flyoff list.

In effect they are global flyoffs, but appear to the Nware programmer as local flyoffs, as they are automatically prefixed by the device id of the parent block at compilation time.

Thinking about this you woudl probably not use them much in the flyoff tree and in the right click flyoff menu, so maybe an option in preferences to not display local flyoffs in these lists?

4 Reply by phils

  • phils
  • Member
  • Offline
  • From: Sydney, Australia
  • Registered: 2007-08-15
  • Posts: 322

Re: Local Control Flyoffs ....please

Just looking in from the sidelines...
Would it be similar to the flyoffs that are generated in a heirarchical block?
These have identical names, but are obviously limited in scope, and don't appear on the Flyoffs tab.

"The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place."
                                                                                        - George Bernard Shaw

5 Reply by Joe Kurta

  • Joe Kurta
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2007-08-17
  • Posts: 1,179

Re: Local Control Flyoffs ....please

This discussion actually brings up something I was going to crate a topic for based on feedback from a recent class...

The flyoffs within a Heirarchical/DSP block are very confusing for first time users.  Keep in mind that everyone in this forum is an advanced user/developer.  One of the perspectives that we bring is teaching first time users.  They get very confused with the concept of a flyoff inside a block that can be edited but doesn't show up on the flyoff list.

Having said that, I think local flyoffs is a great idea.  They scope should only pertain to child window they are in (including all tabs).  THEY SHOULD LOOK DIFFERENT.  Choose a different shape, color, something to distinguish them from everything else.  Also, the ones that appear inside a Heirarchical/DSP block that connect to the I/O of that block should also look different from standard flyoffs!

...just my opinion.

Thanks,

Joe