Build 295.10 - Release Version

Quote from OyunKaosu

I have an object with some values,strings and/or flags.And I made a copy of that object and changing at least one of the values,strings and/or flags with an event.

Then i made another event that triggers when some of the alterable items matching with the conditions for the object (first or copied).

When the one of the first or copied object matches the conditions the event is triggering for that object (first or copied).

Because of i also used "one action when event loops" condition, that event is working on one of that objects(first or copied).

But it's not working on the other copies even their alterable items are matching with the conditions.

According to my theory,one of the copies of that object's alterable items are already matching with the conditions and because of i used "one action when event loops" condition,the event is not triggers for the other copies of the object.

So I making a request to make that event work for each copy of the object when their alterable items are matches with the conditions even the event has "one action when event loops" condition

The example event i'm talking about:

*alterable value A(active) = 1

*alterable string A(active) = "something"

*Only one action when event loops

-switch flag 1 to on

Display More

Re-mentioning my update request.

Something I would really love to NOT see in Fusion is the words 'Alterable Variable'!

The madness that happens when you don't force people to name their variables!! To this day it's and endless nightmare of combing through mystery alterable variable A, B, C,.....
Please login to see this attachment.

All this madness should at least be hidden!
Please login to see this attachment.

Even CT paid examples suffer from these bad practices making learning an absolute pain!! Would be awesome if only user-named variables show up! Fusion literally breaks the first rule of programing: NAME YOUR VARIABLES! Give them meaningful names.

Quote from Edel

Even CT paid examples suffer from these bad practices making learning an absolute pain!! Would be awesome if only user-named variables show up! Fusion literally breaks the first rule of programing: NAME YOUR VARIABLES! Give them meaningful names.

You can rename them if you go into frame editor. Fusion even merges the names if they're the same for all the objects in a qualifier.
And there's a Base Frame in app properties for getting the names from a frame in the app, for global events.

That aside, the developer picks what to do with an alt value/string. So Fusion can't name them.
The examples should name them, though. But it is sometimes confusing to new users who don't realise you can name them - it's like someone conjured up a new set of variables out of the air and made an alternative-universe Active.

Quote from Phi

You can rename them if you go into frame editor. Fusion even merges the names if they're the same for all the objects in a qualifier.
And there's a Base Frame in app properties for getting the names from a frame in the app, for global events.

That aside, the developer picks what to do with an alt value/string. So Fusion can't name them.
The examples should name them, though. But it is sometimes confusing to new users who don't realise you can name them - it's like someone conjured up a new set of variables out of the air and made an alternative-universe Active.

yeah, of course you can rename them but I think it would be best for Fusion to act as if they do not exist! You have to declare them!! You should be made to name them!!

Quote from Edel

yeah, of course you can rename them but I think it would be best for Fusion to act as if they do not exist! You have to declare them!! You should be made to name them!!

I agree, this is a good idea.

I don't know if it's a know issue but the grid and font tools buttons seem to be offset,

Please login to see this attachment.

Quote from mugimiso

Hi,
I'm trying to create an ios app.
However, I am having an issue where an error occurs in the xcode emulator.

As a test, I created a project with the following content:
・1 frame
・Only one active object was placed.
The active object uses the image that is already included.
No images I own are used.

I take the project I created and transfer it to my mac and open it in xcode.
I ran "start the active scheme".
The build was successful.
But on the simulator I get an error.
(Error screen will be uploaded)
I haven't changed any settings in xcode.

I run "Stop the running scheme or application".
Next, run the app in question from the simulator screen.
Then I get the message "The program terminated unexpectedly."
　Exception Type :EXC_BAD_ACCESS(SIGBUS)
　Exception SubType:KERN_PROTECTION_FAILURE
This is part of the message provided.
If you need any other information I can let you know.
When I looked up the error EXC_BAD_ACCESS (SIGBUS) on the Internet,
I found that it occurs when trying to write to read-only memory.

I tried creating a different project.
One frame and one active object.
Up to this point, it's the same.
Uncheck create at start for active objects.
This will result in a project that has no objects at all at run time.
In this case, the above error will not occur.

My execution environment
　macmini 2023(Apple M2)
　xcode 15.4
　macos Sonoma14.6
　clickteamFusion2.5+ developer (Build R295 10)

would be happy to learn how to solve the problem.Please login to see this attachment.

Display More

I have also been getting similar problems, and first thought it was my mac running out of memory as it's an M2 8GB model..
Basically running on iOS 17.0 and earlier it would be working fine, but anything after that it crashes while trying to do OpenGL stuff (You can check the trace via Xcode debugging tools).

It seems to only happen on the simulator weirdly enough, so probably an issue with the emulation layer dealing with OpenGL. For now stick with real device testing or simulator running iOS 17.0 (or 18.0 if you are on Xcode 16) (Even Vision OS 2.0 works fine)

Quote from Edel

yeah, of course you can rename them but I think it would be best for Fusion to act as if they do not exist! You have to declare them!! You should be made to name them!!

People who don't name their alterable values deserve everything they get

Quote from Volnaiskra

People who don't name their alterable values deserve everything they get

I've always felt it comes back to us as a community and especially newer users.

Even from more mainstream examples / users I still see it! 'alterable value soup' :
Please login to see this attachment.

Visually it looks confusing!

Please login to see this attachment.

It's an absolute nightmare (this last one it from another MFA example)!!
Please login to see this attachment.

Not to mention FLAGS 0,1,2,3.......

Quote from Edel

I've always felt its comes back to us as a community and especially newer users.

Even from more mainstream examples / users I still see it! 'alterable value soup' :
Please login to see this attachment.

Visually it looks confusing!

Please login to see this attachment.

It's an absolute nightmare (this last one it from another MFA example)!!
Please login to see this attachment.

Not to mention FLAGS 0,1,2,3.......

Display More

Oh, I was just being facetious. In reality I'm totally with you. Even though I often see unamed altVals, it still somehow surprises me every time, because I find it incomprehensible that anyone could not see how counter-productive that is. And it's appalling when people do it in paid product; it's disrespectful to your customers, who'll have to spend 5 times as long figuring out how it works. I get similarly annoyed when I see teal diamonds, instead of graphics that differentiate the objects and/or hint at their purpose.

I agree with you in principle that Fusion should probably find a way to dissuade users from leaving altVals unnamed. The fact that we see unnamed altVals so often shows that far too many users are doing it, which is bad for everyone. Not just for the people trying to understand examples or clickstore items, but also for beginners who do it themselves, as they'll inevitably make more mistakes or logical errors as they get more confused by their own code down the line.

I also agree that all these unnamed altVals everywhere can clog up the interface (If you've named only 2 altVals, then you probably don't use Alterable Values C-Z, so why should Fusion show them to you everywhere? )

But I don't think there's much that Fusion can do about this, as sometimes these unnamed altVals still need to be accessible. Even I, who am allergic to haphazardly disorganised code, sometimes use unnamed altVals.

For example, I use Alterable Value ID to store "IDs" that marry objects together. It's perfect, because as well as already saying "ID", it's so far down the list that it'll [almost] never conflict with any objects' named altVals, so can safely be used for everything. (It's also so far down the list that having to name it manually each time would be a nightmare). Others use Alterable Value X and Alterable Value Y similarly. I also use Alterable Value IN to transfer objects' Instance Values from my level editor to my engine. If I set an Instance value in an object in my Level Editor frame, I then copy this value to Alterable Value IN when I re-create the object in my Engine frame, since writing to the Instance Value itself is impossible at runtime. Again, using an unnamed value that's way down the list is ideal for this, as it means I can use the same process for any object at all, without fear of altVal conflicts.

I am familiar with the binary format (MMF2GLOBALVALUES, MMF2GLOBALSTRINGS, etc) in which Fusion manages variables and string data, but since variable names are merely keys tied to specific indexes, if you don't want to be nameless, you will have no choice but to set them to hard-coded, absolutely unchangeable names on the editor side.

What is defined as the default name is actually empty, but becomes an "Alterable Value" or "Alterable String". It may be that you want to define variables and strings as "int *" and "string *" as in actual programming, but even in that case, there are plenty of coders who give names that make no sense, and I can assure you that this is a user problem, not a feature problem. Editors cannot control what people do.

However, I agree with adding a feature to make it easier to name them. I have created my own application to build clipboard binaries with binary object, and it would be useful to have that in the editor from the get-go.

The data needed is the type of data (0,1,4,6,8=Global Value, Value, Global String, String, Flag), index, key, and value to store. It is useful to be able to construct variables and string data by simply pasting.

It could be usefull to get alterable values/strings/flags 's name into expression editor.

For example, I want to store alterables strings into a file with key/value:

On loop "save_values"
+ write line $alterableStrName(loopIndex("save_values")) + "="+ alterableStrValue(loopIndex("save_values"))

Quote from Xenon3000

It could be usefull to get alterable values/strings/flags 's name into expression editor.

For example, I want to store alterables strings into a file with key/value:

On loop "save_values"
+ write line $alterableStrName(loopIndex("save_values")) + "="+ alterableStrValue(loopIndex("save_values"))

This is indeed a good idea.