|
|||
author | remove search highlighting | ||
---|---|---|---|
posted: 21 May 2020 19:43 from: Paul Boyd
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Martin I've just spotted what would seem to be a bug! In my ongoing outside slip saga, I've added a prefix tag to each template of 'Slip', which shows on the trackpad as [Slip]-CR037 or whatever. When I use the group all templates with matching tag(s) functions it also picks up a couple of other templates where the name happens to start with the word Slip, but it isn't a tag - no square brackets. That wasn't the behaviour I was expecting - I just wanted those tagged templates to be grouped. The screenshot shows what I mean. I could rename the two inadvertently grouped templates but I'd be worried generally about accidentally grouping a template off-screen and moving it around with the group. You'll probably tell me it's meant to do that! Cheers, Paul 105_211440_520000000.png |
||
posted: 21 May 2020 22:47 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Paul, It's definitely not meant to do that! If not, perhaps you could post the .box file? edit: I have now found the bug, thanks for reporting it. cheers, Martin. |
||
posted: 22 May 2020 00:59 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
p.s. Paul, I think I have found something. If you use this method to create the group of tagged templates, by clicking on one of them: 2_211946_080000000.png then if there are any templates already in a group, they will remain so and the tagged templates will be added to that group. On the other hand, if you use this method to create the group of tagged templates: 2_211951_240000000.png then if there are any templates already in a group, you will be asked whether to add the tagged templates to that group, or whether to create a new group without them. I can't remember why I made the first method work that way, but it's clearly an intended function in the code, not just an oversight. I will see if I can remember the reason, but if not I will change it so that both methods are the same. cheers, Martin. |
||
posted: 22 May 2020 06:52 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
p.p.s. Paul, I have now remembered why the first method is different. A template can have multiple tags, and in adding the group for each tag you would not want multiple messages asking about adding templates to an existing group. So that is an issue in not deselecting any existing group before starting. I have now fixed that for the next program update. edit: I have now found the bug, many thanks for reporting it. Fixed in next program update. It does raise the question of what should happen where a template contains multiple tags. Do you group all the templates containing any of the tags, or only those matching all the tags? At present it is the former. I have added extra menu items to cover the latter option: 2_220305_300000000.png cheers, Martin. |
||
posted: posted: 22 May 2020 09:30 from: Paul Boyd
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Good morning Martin! Don't you sleep? This must have been weighing on your mind! Firstly, this is on a native Windows system, Win10 x64. Secondly, I've just replicated it on another totally unrelated layout, for which the box file is attached. The process I used was:- Open the box file. Individually group three templates. From the group menu, add prefix tag to names, in this case I typed ref. The templates then had a [ref] prefix. I then hit Ctrl-Y to ungroup everything. I renamed another template to ref. Nothing is grouped at this stage. Click one of the tagged templates and from the menu that pops up selecting N then T groups the tagged templates but also the one that has the name ref. It doesn't matter if the single template is named before or after I add the tags to the other three. I would expect that method to add the tagged templates to any already grouped templates, and in fact I use that quite a bit. One layout has a 3-way stub point leading to a yard complex - the yard and 3-way each have their own tags, but if I want to move the lot I group by tag for each in turn to make one big group. The second method in your PS I've never used! In your PPS, yes, I do very occasionally have a template with multiple tags, and in my example above I could have had the 3-way with both [3way] and [yard] tags which would save a few mouse clicks, but I tend not to do that for some unknown reason! It should definitely be group if it contains any of the tags, and not all! I've attached a starting box file, this is the one on which I replicated the problem this morning. I'll attach the same file but with tags and renaming in a second. Cheers, Paul |
||
Attachment: attach_3069_3675_canalwharf_untagged.box 63 | |||
Last edited on 22 May 2020 09:35 by Paul Boyd |
|||
22 May 2020 09:30 from: Paul Boyd
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
This is after I've renamed a template and added tags to another three. | ||
Attachment: attach_3070_3675_canal_wharf_tagged.box 70 | |||
posted: posted: 22 May 2020 09:48 from: Paul Boyd
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Ah - it looks like you found the bug whilst I was replicating it! | ||
22 May 2020 09:48 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Paul, Many thanks for that. But while you were posting I did actually find the bug and fix it. I edited my previous posts as quickly as I could but you probably didn't see it in time. I've added new menu options for multiple tags, trying to cover all likely requirements, so many thanks for this topic. cheers, Martin. |
||
posted: 22 May 2020 09:50 from: Paul Boyd
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Whoops - we're crossing - your updates didn't show until I reloaded the screen. I'm glad it wasn't something I'd misunderstood! Cheers, Paul |
||
posted: 22 May 2020 10:10 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Yes we're crossing. Sorry I didn't get my posts edited in time. I realised the bug while eating breakfast. This dialog now appears for both methods (previously only when using the main menu): 2_220502_280000000.png BTW, I have done a lot more work on make diamond-crossing at intersection, so that it is more accurate and preserves the original alignment and boundaries from the background template. That has made it quite a bit slower, but it means you can now create a diamond-crossing across a background template which is part of a trackplan and not need to do any further work on that template (apart from the usual timber-shoving stuff). cheers, Martin. |
||
posted: 22 May 2020 11:29 from: Jim Guthrie
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Martin Wynne wrote:
Martin, Is an update available? Jim. |
||
posted: 22 May 2020 11:45 from: Martin Wynne
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Jim Guthrie wrote:Is an update available?Hi Jim, Sorry, not yet. 226c should be along in a day or two, but there are still some loose ends to finish. I also need to write some notes about it and maybe make a video. I still haven't found what made your original diamond-crossing such a problem. Even now, it is creating an unusual mix of crossing angles. But it does at least work. Ideally, I should spend hours and hours testing every conceivable size and location of diamond-crossing, but I just don't have time for that. It's working in several test cases, that will have to be enough. cheers, Martin. |
||
posted: 22 May 2020 12:11 from: Paul Boyd
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hi Martin Thanks for fixing this - looking forward to the next release! This dialog now appears for both methods (previously only when using the main menu):My own preference for that dialogue box would be for the default action to be add to existing group but as the dialogue box is already established I guess it shouldn't change now. I've never actually used the option of grouping by tag from the main menu - I need to have a refresh of what's in all those menus! I think that these days "slower" is a relative term, if diamonds will be more accurate, then slightly slower is fine. Mind you, last night I was printing off a background with picture shapes and that took for ever - fortunately not something I do often and even then only to confirm the basic shape before ploughing ahead! Cheers, Paul |
||
Please read this important note about copyright: Unless stated otherwise, all the files submitted to this web site are copyright and the property of the respective contributor. You are welcome to use them for your own personal non-commercial purposes, and in your messages on this web site. If you want to publish any of this material elsewhere or use it commercially, you must first obtain the owner's permission to do so. |