Pretty self explanatory if you download the file. So what is going on, and why does it only remove 1 and 3?
My guess is that the fastloop index is un-synced with the amount of items on the list since it takes 1 tick to do deletion on the list even though it is in the fastloop. How the hell are you supposed to loop through a list though if this is the case? I mean is the only way to start the loop 1 times instead and have a counter that triggers the loop 1 times again, so that the list has been properly updated before it runs again? Again, this just seems ****ty to me. Come to think of it, that would mean one couldn't use the fastloop index in the first place to locate items.
All I want to do is loop through a list and delete an item on whatever line it is when it corresponds to a string it has pulled from another object.
**EDIT**
I made a system that sets a target depending on the amount of list items currently there +1, and then increments another variable until it hits this list target, whenever it encounters a certain string in a list that is running parallel it will delete the line with the incrementing variable index from both lists. It works, and it will actually work for me since this is quite the rare occasion. But if this is the only way to do this, it is quite frankly very sad. If someone were to need to loop through a list for more complicated reasons they would be completely effed. I must be doing something wrong, fusion can't be this bad with list items. I mean it doesn't understand the simple "if list index equals fast loop index" without a variable (someone might have to create a variable for each event instead of just doing this), and way worse is that it still let's me scope for this, but it just doesn't work.
Furthermore, this almost completely nullifies the reason to use a list object in the first place for a lot of purposes that it would be perfect for. If one can't loop through a list and compare against index and line to detect data on the list, and therefore need to create separate logic for each time they do something like what I am doing, one could just as well use a string in an active object, at least it would overwrite itself. The thing is I am inputting another line at the end of this action, which means that whenever the line is different, I need to have a completely separate fastloop system for each event. Even more complicated is the fact that since one needs to use incrementing variables to find the index of a list instead of just comparing against the index of a list, it means that each time two of these events can be executed simultaneously one needs to have separate target and incrementation variables for every event. And my game is turn-based so I have full control, and still I won't risk this happening by using the same variable. Since, unlike most software engineers these days (it seems), I refuse to allow even the slightest chance for a bug happening. Even if it is something as rare as 1 in 10000 playthroughs... I simply won't have it. There is no reason to not write things properly from the get go.
