Build 292.22 - Release version

Yes, "contain" would be the clearer word, not "have".

I get your point that this 'feature' lets you choose whether to select with more precision or less. But here's my problem with that: to choose with more precision, you just pick an object with ABCDE..... but what if you can't find one? What if you have 98 objects with ABCD and 1 object with ABCDE and 1 with ABCDEF? you first have to manually find the ABCDE and ABCDEF objects to deselect them, which could take you 3 minutes...

Quote from Volnaiskra

Yes, "contain" would be the clearer word, not "have".

I get your point that this 'feature' lets you choose whether to select with more precision or less. But here's my problem with that: to choose with more precision, you just pick an object with ABCDE..... but what if you can't find one? What if you have 98 objects with ABCD and 1 object with ABCDE and 1 with ABCDEF? you first have to manually find the ABCDE and ABCDEF objects to deselect them, which could take you 3 minutes...

I have a quite simple "routine". When I end up with a quite new object with unique combination of qualifiers, I add in a corner of my scene editor some kind of "prototype object" (a simple active), which has the same combination of qualifiers. This object does litterally nothing. It's not even created at runtime, but it helps me select all objects with the same qualifiers, when needed It's probably not the best way Fusion could allow us to handle this, but it's very simple to do and very useful during development (like a custom button to select some combination of qualifiers)

Not a bad workaround.

Though actually the thing that annoys me the most about selecting qualifiers is that their order is so sensitive. So if you select an object with ABCD and another object with ACBD, the properties window will display them as having no qualifiers. And if you then add the qualifier E to the selected objects, they both end up with E, with A/B/C/D removed.

This also doesn't play nice with the "select objects with the same qualifiers" feature, because that feature will select both the ABCD object and the ACBD object. And yet the properties window will act as if they had no qualifiers, and trying to add one will remove all existing qualifiers. So on the one hand, Fusion tells you explicitly that these objects have "the same qualifiers", yet on the other hand it treats those "same qualifiers" as if they were fundamentally incompatible. This has bugged me for years. So I guess the ABCD ≠ ABCDE issue just feels like yet another layer of inconsistency to add to the confusion.

There would at least be a relatively easy way to fix this problem, if "select objects with the same qualifiers" was more precise. You could select an ABCD object, and it would select all the ABCD objects plus the ACBD, ADCB, DCBA etc. objects. Then you could easily wipe their qualifiers away and give them the qualifiers ABCD, so that they were now all identical and fully compatible....But, this solution is unsafe because of how "select objects with the same qualifiers" works, because it will also select ABCDE objects - so if you wipe and replace with ABCD, you'll have lost the E for those objects.

I've experienced this before, and it can create really horrible bugs that are a pain to fix. Because when you unknowingly remove a qualifier from an object, there's no trace of that qualifier ever being there, so it's hard to debug. It may even take you days or weeks to discover the bug, and by then you have no idea when exactly you removed the qualifiers, or how many other objects might have been affected.

So, despite the "select objects with the same qualifiers" feature added to :cf25+:, Fusion still remains without a convenient and safe way to select objects with certain qualifiers. Your workaround would help, [MENTION=8640]Windlake[/MENTION], but it would require some micromanaging, and is still unsafe if you ever try to combine it with adding additional qualifiers

[MENTION=15682]Volnaiskra[/MENTION]
I see what you mean. I've never had to reset multiple qualifiers in my project, so never run into this kind of mess lol
I took the habit to define all the qualifiers I need upstream, but I get your point.

Still, I think the actual option works as intended.
We should have another option like "select objects with same qualifiers (strict)" and I can see many uses for this one too, now that i'm considering it.

I have an idea but I think it's too complicated to add:

An option to group objects in scene editor, when you create a group, objects stay together when you move the group.

Another one on working with objects and may be difficult to implement- easy access to the last few objects you've had to reference - for example, easily drop reference to one of the last ten actives you've referenced in the Event Editor. Also, the ability to do the same with your most references objects/groups.

Also - a HUGE one would be IntelliSense added to the Expression Editor - just the ability to have it auto-suggest actives and function names, along with a prompt as to what each function is expecting to see as variables within the brackets would be really good.

Any plans for anything with regards to the above?

Just found that fusion has built in log/ln/e^x but no x^y ( in Special object→calculation→). Seems that custom fastloop is the only compute method in current version.
So why we don't have built-in x^y ? is there any difficulties to add this in fusion ?
X)

Quote from defisym

Just found that fusion has built in log/ln/e^x but no x^y ( in Special object→calculation→). Seems that custom fastloop is the only compute method in current version.
So why we don't have built-in x^y ? is there any difficulties to add this in fusion ?
X)

Do you mean raising X to the power of Y? If so, "X pow Y" will work

Quote from marbenx

Do you mean raising X to the power of Y? If so, "X pow Y" will work

Thanks ! Found it in expression dialogbox→Misc.
( So, is it possible to put Misc. expressions into special object expressions ? )

I have a suggestion: When global values/strings are disabled for a Sub-Application, it could send the global values/strings set inside it to the subapp alterable values/strings (currently it doesn't have alterable values/strings)

Feature Request: Activate/Deactivate Groups > Use Expression

edit: Actually I can achieve what I want using loops using loops

BUG: Cannot build apps containing certain extensions (e.g. Move by Bezier). CTF will show a message that these extensions are incompatible with the chosen build type.

Easy to reproduce - create a new app, place the Move By Bezier extension, and build.

[MENTION=5163]Blizna[/MENTION] It works ... Move By Bezier is only compatible with Windows exporter.

For me, it does not but works just fine on previous builds. I use Windows build type, obviously. That why I raise it as a bug. Move by Bezier and also the Pathfinding ext. I cannot build a fresh empty app if it contains either.

See the screenshot below:
Please login to see this attachment.

Ah I allready showed this. Check if you have the files in Fusion's Data/Runtime folder. I think you will need to reinstall your extensions.

Yep, everything is in place. Will try to reinstall then.

Quote from fnkycoldmadeanr

Feature Request: Activate/Deactivate Groups > Use Expression

edit: Actually I can achieve what I want using loops using loops

I'm guessing you wanted to be able to Activate/Deactivate a Frame's groups from Global Events? Loops are a good workaround for this, though it would be probably a bit cleaner to be able to do it via expression. So I'd still be happy to see that implemented one day.

Feature Request:

A way to see the index number of a specific alterable value from the properties. This would be useful when using the AltValN function when an object have large numbers of values. Otherwise I have to count one by one if the value has the index number of 33 or 34 etc. Any suggestions to get around this would also be appreciated.

+1 on the Alterable Value and Flag numbering in the UI. The same for Animations in the Image Editor would be awesome as well. Also please make sure it is 0 or 1-based, depending on how the values are handled by expressions.

Features suggestion: Pasting sub-app into background (like we can do with Actives)
Because a workaround for this would be using the Surface object, which isn't that much more compatible with other platforms...