Control over "stacking order" of wires with pins in common
When multiple wires share a series of wire pins, the wires are "stacked" - displaced up or down by one or more wire widths to ensure that they're not in exactly the same place on the microchip canvas and can be accurately targeted with the imp if you scale the canvas up.
This is OK for the cases where the stacking order makes sense - for example, an output tweak with eight outgoing wires and the stacking order is the same as the positions of the wire destinations on the canvas - topmost wire to topmost gadget, second topmost wire to second topmost gadget and so on.
But that's not always what we get. The case in the example above - an output tweak with eight outgoing wires - is just as likely to get a stacking order that appears random with wires crossing at the point where they diverge. And the stacking order can change when another pin is added to a wire. The new pin doesn't have to be a shared pin - it doesn't even have to be on one of the wires in the stack at all.
The wire stacking feature in its current state is throwing away the tidiness that we hoped to gain by adding the pins.
It would be a great improvement if we could manually adjust a wire's position in a stack - perhaps D-pad up and D-pad down while the imp is highlighting a wire would be a good choice of control for this.
-
The "ribbon" effect they added is cool, but as you say can be messy in how it decides to lay things out.
Personally, I'd be fine with them all just following a single line in the same exact spot. You can always grab a wire where it goes into that bundle or comes out of it. And it would just look perfectly tidy no matter what.
-
Personally, I'd be fine with them all just following a single line in the same exact spot. You can always grab a wire where it goes into that bundle or comes out of it. And it would just look perfectly tidy no matter what.
That would be fine for me too - there's no chance of getting confused provided that you don't make wires of neither the same source nor the same destination share a series of more than one pin, and that's a thing that I never do. And it already seems perfectly happy to have wires following a single line in the case where you only have two wires, one with pins and one with no pins.
-
I like this idea! I have always thought it would be cool if they changed the stlying of "stacked" wires. Just make that particular wire type thicker and then let us branch off it instead. We can already organise the wire by adding junctions/nodes, so it is the next logical step to let us branch off another wire from the junction. (not sure if junction is the correct Dreams terminology).
Behind the scenes, Dreams would have to convert these into multiple wires but for the user it would make things much cleaner. No longer have to move a bazillion wires and reorganise.
Accedi per aggiungere un commento.