Hi,
I think I've found a stabilty bug in the latest Fixture Editor (v4.10.1).
When editing capabilities for a large definition the editor will suddenly go 'write only' and disallow further additions to the list. Exiting and then reentering the <edit channel> dialogue eventually crashes the software.
The attached file is now in a state where the red plus button is no longer responsive at all.
Is there a limit to the number of capabilities in a channel? There's no indication if it is 40 that this is so. Take a look at the FX Wheel attached.
Boxy
Fixture editor bug
-
- Posts: 306
- Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2015 8:18 am
- Real Name: Robert Box
- Attachments
-
- Martin-MAC-Quantum-Profile.qxf
- (29.44 KiB) Downloaded 31 times
-
- Posts: 637
- Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2015 6:30 pm
- Real Name: David
Steps to reproduce a crash:
- create a new channel
- Add a capability with the + button, don't touch its parameters. This cap will cover the value range 0-255
- Click on the + button again, this will not create a new cap. This is because the whole 0-255 range is already used. -> This is what you think is a bug
- Now change any of the parameters of the currently selected. The FixtureEditor will crash. -> This is a real stability issue, that will be resolved pretty soon
- create a new channel
- Add a capability with the + button, don't touch its parameters. This cap will cover the value range 0-255
- Click on the + button again, this will not create a new cap. This is because the whole 0-255 range is already used. -> This is what you think is a bug
- Now change any of the parameters of the currently selected. The FixtureEditor will crash. -> This is a real stability issue, that will be resolved pretty soon
-
- Posts: 306
- Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2015 8:18 am
- Real Name: Robert Box
I see that bug clearly. Not letting me add another range (between 191 and 235 on FX Wheel (Wheel 3) in the Martin fixture is a different bug though? This range is not occupied.
If was my attempts to add the above that created the reproducible crash.
Good work.
-
- Posts: 637
- Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2015 6:30 pm
- Real Name: David
I reproduce this bug on 4.10.1 but not with the latest sources. Must have been fixed after the release of 4.10.1boxy wrote:I see that bug clearly. Not letting me add another range (between 191 and 235 on FX Wheel (Wheel 3) in the Martin fixture is a different bug though? This range is not occupied.
- mcallegari
- Posts: 4827
- Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2015 9:09 am
- Location: Italy
- Real Name: Massimo Callegari
- Contact:
Yep, I think I have done some more changes as I was not happy about the initial code.plugz wrote:I reproduce this bug on 4.10.1 but not with the latest sources. Must have been fixed after the release of 4.10.1boxy wrote:I see that bug clearly. Not letting me add another range (between 191 and 235 on FX Wheel (Wheel 3) in the Martin fixture is a different bug though? This range is not occupied.
I'll try the same later today.
@boxy: as the official fixtures reviewer, it would be nice if you can always be up to date with the developments. Yesterday I built a Windows TEST version. Can you please try that and see if it works now ?
-
- Posts: 306
- Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2015 8:18 am
- Real Name: Robert Box
I don't have admin rights on my Windows machine so installing from source is very difficult (installing the relevant apps). I can try from Linux but not managed a successful build yet.
Indeed, I have to use my phone as a hotspot to update QLC+ anyway (via a certain network...) as it is now blocked!
Installing test version now...
Indeed, I have to use my phone as a hotspot to update QLC+ anyway (via a certain network...) as it is now blocked!
Installing test version now...
-
- Posts: 306
- Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2015 8:18 am
- Real Name: Robert Box
The crashing bug is still there with the new code.
There are also frustrating constraints which stop you renumbering capability ranges within a channel. I want to move 'Inverse Square Law Dimming' from 20-25 to 70-74 and it won't have it, even though the latter range is empty. I may have to do some manual xml editing to get this done.
There are also frustrating constraints which stop you renumbering capability ranges within a channel. I want to move 'Inverse Square Law Dimming' from 20-25 to 70-74 and it won't have it, even though the latter range is empty. I may have to do some manual xml editing to get this done.
-
- Posts: 637
- Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2015 6:30 pm
- Real Name: David
Hi,
Did you build from the latest sources, or did you use a TEST version ?boxy wrote: The crashing bug is still there with the new code.
Still the same MAC Quantum fixture ? Which channel ?boxy wrote:There are also frustrating constraints which stop you renumbering capability ranges within a channel. I want to move 'Inverse Square Law Dimming' from 20-25 to 70-74 and it won't have it, even though the latter range is empty. I may have to do some manual xml editing to get this done.
-
- Posts: 306
- Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2015 8:18 am
- Real Name: Robert Box
I used the TEST version from the link in this thread.
I've just posted the MAC Viper Profile fixture in the Fixture Requests forum. It was easier to edit the xml for the Control/Settings channel - I would rather the editor do a check when I press OK instead of preventing the user from moving things around during changes.
I've just posted the MAC Viper Profile fixture in the Fixture Requests forum. It was easier to edit the xml for the Control/Settings channel - I would rather the editor do a check when I press OK instead of preventing the user from moving things around during changes.
-
- Posts: 637
- Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2015 6:30 pm
- Real Name: David
The test version contains the fix for the "Cannot add a channel even though there is available space" bug. It does not contain the fix for the crash yetboxy wrote: I used the TEST version from the link in this thread.
I'll see if I can do something.boxy wrote: I've just posted the MAC Viper Profile fixture in the Fixture Requests forum. It was easier to edit the xml for the Control/Settings channel - I would rather the editor do a check when I press OK instead of preventing the user from moving things around during changes.
- mcallegari
- Posts: 4827
- Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2015 9:09 am
- Location: Italy
- Real Name: Massimo Callegari
- Contact:
Should I build a new Windows TEST version ?
-
- Posts: 637
- Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2015 6:30 pm
- Real Name: David
[WORK IN PROGRESS]
Boxy, would this be better ?
You can enter any value, but as long as the range is invalid, it won't be applied to the capability.
(implementation here: https://github.com/plugz/qlcplus/tree/e ... ow-invalid )
Boxy, would this be better ?
You can enter any value, but as long as the range is invalid, it won't be applied to the capability.
(implementation here: https://github.com/plugz/qlcplus/tree/e ... ow-invalid )