sendmodelingcommand problem



  • THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED

    On 30/01/2003 at 07:08, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    User Information:
    Cinema 4D Version:   8.012 
    Platform:   Windows  ; Mac  ;  Mac OSX  ; 
    Language(s) :     C++  ;

    ---------

    I currently use the "MCOMMAND_JOIN" SendmodelingCommand with a nullobject that has some objects as children. Ok it works. But there occurs a problem. All tags that are on the children will be deleted and won´t appear in the returned object. This behavior is the same in Cinema 4D when the nullobject is selected too. But when I use multiselection only for the child objects, all tags are saved and the returned object has them too. 
    
    So, this should also be possible with the join command. But how to pass multiselected objects to the sendmodeling command? There is only one input object pointer that can be "filled"... :\
    
    Thanks in advance
    
    Samir
    


  • THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED

    On 30/01/2003 at 08:36, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    Could you not just copy the tags over yourself? I do :)



  • THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED

    On 30/01/2003 at 12:28, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    hehe, yes I could BUT I have to use the join command in any case, so this wouldn´t hurt in speed, copying the tags myself would cost more speed. But why using a workaround, when it actually should be available?! :)



  • THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED

    On 30/01/2003 at 13:27, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    copying the tags yourself wouldn't cost anything most since that would be exactly what join is likely to do! and the modelling commands are just SDK ways to access the menu functions, so it works as it should ;-) this might not be how you want it, but it really is a minor speed issue to copy some tags! and as I said, many clone and copy operations occur internally, you would be do nothing out of the ordinary. If a function isn't work as you want, or you can't find what you need, do it yourself, that is always the best policy! if later on something appears to correct it, great, but don't bet on it with any SDK, you really don't want to make the mistake of some parties and cancel or hold back plugins simply for lack of a feature or bug, find a solution, if it works, use it, if you can't change it, simplify it, users would prefer a 99% working plugin (99% of the features you wanted) than no plugin at all! IMHO!



  • THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED

    On 30/01/2003 at 13:33, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    yes, you are right of course concerning a workaround (vice versa possible either ;) first check if available and if not, just make it work! :), but when copying tags from 5000 objects, it surely does take some time! imagine each object has 5 tags, 25.000 iterations additionally. That´s a lot I think, or am I assuming this wrongly? then also checking which of those tags shall be copied and which shan´t...don´t know...
    Thanks!
    Best Samir



  • THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED

    On 30/01/2003 at 14:14, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    If you are really copying that many tags, maybe you need to rethink why and how that works ;-) when you JOIN, they all become one object, so it makes little sense to duplicate all them tags! most tags can only have 1 per object. Really though, JOIN would only have to do the same thing, so you wouldn't be doing anything extra, plus, you are more likely to know what and why tags need copying than JOIN simply copying all of them without a care in the world :o)



  • THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED

    On 30/01/2003 at 14:21, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    upps, you are right. sorry, that was a wrong train of thought by me...man it is pretty late here.. ;)
    Thanks for your patience. I´m a difficult case I know :)
    Best
    Samir
    P.S: Anyway, Join should support multiselection, to fit the new c4d way. take it as an idea.



  • THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED

    On 30/01/2003 at 23:54, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    Glad you got it sorted :) not sure where ideas go, but I don't think it is here :-/ I'll see if I can find out.


Log in to reply