User:Broken/NonBlockingToolsChat

From BlenderWiki

Non-blocking tools IRC conversation 04 June =

2008-06-04 10:03:29] <broken> lukep: that sort of thing like loop cut shouldn't be done with those sub-modes in the first place
[2008-06-04 10:03:44] <Briggs> how should loopcut work anyway?
[2008-06-04 10:03:51] * Briggs admits that he has a love-hate relationship with it
[2008-06-04 10:03:57] <broken> Briggs: lukep: let me show yo usomething
[2008-06-04 10:03:59] <Briggs> loopcut is really a compound 'macro' op....
[2008-06-04 10:04:43] <lukep> broken, ideally yes; but some operations are naturally modal if they involve interactivity.
[2008-06-04 10:04:51] <Briggs> loopcut is not one of them
[2008-06-04 10:04:55] <broken> lukep: doesn't have to be that way
[2008-06-04 10:05:04] <Briggs> there is nothing requiring modality for tools like loopcut, its just dang handy.
[2008-06-04 10:05:08] <broken> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1021270522578100101&hl=en
[2008-06-04 10:05:33] <broken> it doesn't have to block the rest of the interface

[2008-06-04 10:05:44] <broken> watch that video, it's me ranting! :)

[2008-06-04 10:07:50] <lukep> all tools need preview and live update

[2008-06-04 10:08:00] <broken> lukep: not preview
[2008-06-04 10:08:03] <broken> but interactivity
[2008-06-04 10:08:10] <broken> like in the loop cut example
[2008-06-04 10:08:23] <broken> you make the loop cut, opens up options for hte loop cut tool somewhere in a panel
[2008-06-04 10:08:34] <Briggs> I agree with that.
[2008-06-04 10:08:40] <broken> then you can toggle (eg) 'smooth' option on or off, and see it happen infront of you

[2008-06-04 10:09:02] <broken> but you can still access rest of the blender interface too
[2008-06-04 10:09:08] <broken> no little constraining sub-modes
[2008-06-04 10:09:26] <Briggs> broken, I think if we had this, we would give modo a run for its money.
[2008-06-04 10:09:56] <Briggs> broken, the select similar stuff is another area....
[2008-06-04 10:10:05] <broken> Briggs: why?
[2008-06-04 10:10:16] <Briggs> broken, its a good point you make I think.

[2008-06-04 10:10:38] <lukep> depending of the tool , preview, or option available after, this is still the same, a modeless mode. Bur for complex ops you want preview only
[2008-06-04 10:10:50] <Briggs> broken, for instance, sometimes I have been very frustrated that I cant say 'select similar with these attributes, AND these attributes, but definitely NOT these attributes

[2008-06-04 10:11:14] <broken> Briggs: that's exactly the csase where something like this would be handy
[2008-06-04 10:11:22] <broken> one tool 'select similar'
[2008-06-04 10:11:26] <Briggs> broken, yep

[2008-06-04 10:11:30] <broken> opens a panel with checkboxes+thresholds
[2008-06-04 10:11:34] <Briggs> broken, I was actually going to write a python script for this honestly.
[2008-06-04 10:11:36] <broken> you change those, it updates immediately
[2008-06-04 10:11:54] <broken> lukep: I disagree
[2008-06-04 10:12:08] <broken> I don't think there's any reasons to have 'previews', it just complicates the issue
[2008-06-04 10:12:12] <broken> and forces you to use them
[2008-06-04 10:12:30] <Briggs> I'm not sure what the distinction here is....
[2008-06-04 10:12:43] <broken> Briggs: here's the distinction:
[2008-06-04 10:12:48] <broken> loop cut now
[2008-06-04 10:12:51] <broken> a) press a key
[2008-06-04 10:12:55] <broken> b) get preview
[2008-06-04 10:13:12] <lukep> broken, I'm used to both in CAD software. Depending of the tool, one is better; For complex operations, preview is often clearer
[2008-06-04 10:13:20] <broken> c) confirm, it does the action, you can see how it's affected the rest of the mesh, you can then do a new tool
[2008-06-04 10:13:28] <broken> with my proposal there's just 
[2008-06-04 10:13:35] <broken> a) press a key, action happens, ready for new stuff
[2008-06-04 10:13:36] <lukep> but direct action is yes good for most tools
[2008-06-04 10:13:54] <broken> step 2, change settings, is completely optional
[2008-06-04 10:14:08] <Briggs> the 'preview' issue is sticky one.
[2008-06-04 10:14:09] <broken> do what you want, and get on with it
[2008-06-04 10:14:22] <Briggs> for instance, in loopcut, the preview may or may not be benefecial?
[2008-06-04 10:14:23] <Briggs> I dont know
[2008-06-04 10:14:31] <Briggs> it actually causes problems for derived mesh anyway
[2008-06-04 10:14:33] <Briggs> the way it is now
[2008-06-04 10:14:49] <Briggs> but being able to mouse over the mesh quickly with feedback of where your new loop will go...
[2008-06-04 10:14:53] <Briggs> thats kind of nessecary?
[2008-06-04 10:15:06] <broken> Briggs: there's nothing saying that can't be possible in my proposal
[2008-06-04 10:15:19] <Briggs> ok.
[2008-06-04 10:15:24] <broken> you just have a way to 'update/change' the selection, as you would any other setting
[2008-06-04 10:15:30] <broken> selection is just an input into the tool
[2008-06-04 10:15:31] <lukep> broken an example is bevel tools. in solidworks you can choose between preview or direct action. and depending on how complex is your model, one is better
[2008-06-04 10:15:33] <Briggs> ok
[2008-06-04 10:15:51] <Briggs> well... this is more an issue of UI toggle... 'live update' maybe?
[2008-06-04 10:15:55] * Briggs shrugs.
[2008-06-04 10:16:14] <Briggs> broken, issue is those preview lines are drawn in a subloop
[2008-06-04 10:16:25] <broken> i realise
[2008-06-04 10:16:33] <broken> which has its own event handling and is evil
[2008-06-04 10:16:35] <Briggs> and that is ok?
[2008-06-04 10:16:36] <Briggs> right
[2008-06-04 10:16:38] <Briggs> it is evil
[2008-06-04 10:16:48] <Briggs> so would preview lines work in your proposal?
[2008-06-04 10:16:58] <broken> Briggs: the preview would be the action
[2008-06-04 10:17:09] <Briggs> yeah ok
[2008-06-04 10:17:11] <Briggs> I can buy that
[2008-06-04 10:17:29] <broken> just like now if you're doing edge loop select with alt click
[2008-06-04 10:17:35] <broken> get the wrong loops? do a new one
[2008-06-04 10:17:54] <Briggs> some people are still sore about edge loop select preview lines going away....
[2008-06-04 10:17:57] <Briggs> (which I find silly)
[2008-06-04 10:18:02] <broken> for the 90% of time you get it right, it's much faster
[2008-06-04 10:18:17] <Briggs> its pretty clear whta is an edge loop and what isnt.... 
[2008-06-04 10:18:20] <broken> and less annoying with things popping up/blocking you all the time
[2008-06-04 10:18:23] <lukep> you can do preview without subloop, btw

[2008-06-04 10:18:55] <Briggs> broken, right, but in this case you are 'locked' by mousing around mesh with that preview draw on...
[2008-06-04 10:19:03] <Briggs> and 'blocked' from the rest of the interface during that time
[2008-06-04 10:19:03] <broken> exactly

[2008-06-04 10:19:09] <Briggs> but people like that
[2008-06-04 10:19:16] <Briggs> they would be angry if its taken away :)
[2008-06-04 10:19:21] <broken> er, no
[2008-06-04 10:19:39] <lukep> just insert a temp draw operation, that will be dismissed when tool is commited or another tool is selectioned
[2008-06-04 10:19:40] <broken> I didn't see peopel screaming in the streets with shift R or whatever it was, was replaced with alt click

[2008-06-04 10:19:52] <Briggs> broken, shif-r? whats that?
[2008-06-04 10:19:52] <broken> lukep: I think that's overcomplicating things unnecessarily
[2008-06-04 10:19:57] <broken> Briggs: the old loop select
[2008-06-04 10:20:02] <Briggs> oh that
[2008-06-04 10:20:02] <broken> that worked like current loop cut does
[2008-06-04 10:20:12] <Briggs> I dont even recall it honestly.

[2008-06-04 10:20:15] <lukep> broken: the MVC model allows that very easily
[2008-06-04 10:20:20] <Briggs> broken, to be clear, in principle I agree with you on this.
[2008-06-04 10:20:21] <broken> Briggs: precisely my point

[2008-06-04 10:20:36] <Briggs> broken, I have always felt that this is bad way of doing things.
[2008-06-04 10:20:37] <broken> lukep: I don't think it's necessary, and I'm not sure why you're so attached to it ;)
[2008-06-04 10:20:53] <Briggs> broken, but for things like changing number of loops...with mousewheel, will that work?
[2008-06-04 10:21:01] <Briggs> it seems you would have to go find some kind of panel and change number...
[2008-06-04 10:21:07] <Briggs> move mouse away from 3d view....
[2008-06-04 10:21:18] <broken> Briggs: true, but there could be shortcuts
[2008-06-04 10:21:33] <Briggs> shortcuts that dont require modality?
[2008-06-04 10:21:36] <lukep> broken, previews are much faster. can be important for instantaneous preview on complex models
[2008-06-04 10:21:47] <broken> lukep: that's a bit of a generalisation
[2008-06-04 10:22:48] <broken> Briggs: especially if it's consistent between tools it could be nice
[2008-06-04 10:22:49] <Briggs> changing number of cuts should be just as fast as it is now with mouse wheel...
[2008-06-04 10:22:56] <lukep> as i said, for simple ops, yup direct action is better, but not always
[2008-06-04 10:23:03] <Briggs> thats why I hate that tool so much
[2008-06-04 10:23:06] <Briggs> as user I love it.
[2008-06-04 10:23:13] <Briggs> as dveloper I think it is evil for its many sins
[2008-06-04 10:23:28] <broken> Briggs: i.e. press some key to jump focus to options panel, mouse wheel to scroll up or down a number field

[2008-06-04 10:23:34] <broken> just as an off-the-top of head example
[2008-06-04 10:23:46] <Briggs> broken, isnt that violating other things?
[2008-06-04 10:23:50] <Briggs> broken, although I wouldnt mind that
[2008-06-04 10:23:55] <Briggs> broken, actually, I would like that quite a bit
[2008-06-04 10:24:02] <Briggs> broken, or have options panel be in 3d view?
[2008-06-04 10:24:04] <Briggs> floating panel... ick
[2008-06-04 10:24:09] <broken> whatever, it's just an example
[2008-06-04 10:24:11] <Briggs> but still would be quick

[2008-06-04 10:27:37] <lukep> in fact the last tool used establish a context, and further actions relates to this until another tool is used
[2008-06-04 10:27:42] <broken> lukep: right

[2008-06-04 10:28:55] <broken> Briggs: it would simplify and streamline so much, there are so many areas
[2008-06-04 10:29:00] <broken> eg. your vertex path select
[2008-06-04 10:29:07] -->| Twingy (n=justin@74.92.144.217) has joined #Blendercoders
[2008-06-04 10:29:11] <broken> you get that bloody popup every time
[2008-06-04 10:29:14] <Briggs> broken, that needs more options... pattern matching, hopping, ect.
[2008-06-04 10:29:15] <Briggs> yes
[2008-06-04 10:29:16] <Briggs> its ugly
[2008-06-04 10:29:23] <Briggs> it needs to select face paths too...
[2008-06-04 10:29:28] <Briggs> all that could be in a simple panel
[2008-06-04 10:29:29] <broken> this would allow all sorts of extra options without getting in the way
[2008-06-04 10:29:30] <broken> right
[2008-06-04 10:29:33] <Briggs> face/edge ring paths
[2008-06-04 10:29:44] <Briggs> also for extrude options... we have more stuff for that now.
[2008-06-04 10:29:49] <broken> yes
[2008-06-04 10:29:52] <Briggs> and bevel code includes new winged extrude type stuff.
[2008-06-04 10:30:06] <Briggs> 'edge extrude', not the non-manifold kind... but the kind that creates 'dents/bumps'
[2008-06-04 10:30:16] <Briggs> so all that can be wrapped into one tool.
[2008-06-04 10:34:01] <Briggs> broken, Ton seems to be on same page with you about this one?
[2008-06-04 10:34:30] <broken> at least he was at that time :)