Braza wrote: ↑
Sat Oct 31, 2020 10:28 am
Ok. I got your point.
Then: Why not letting the end user define the name of the macro as a string parameter?
Well, that is my intention.
The goal is a nice and well-thought UI/UX.
See, if the provided string is wrong, because, well, mistakes happen, I want to prevent the whole object from failing, because this makes for a bad UX – the user might not know that they typed the name in wrongly.
Or a different case I'm actually working one:
There are multiple macros to be used. Now, I will deliver some basic macros along the main object. But I want to give the user the possibility to use their own macros.
I could now say: okay, here is a big list of all macros, give me your own name for each of them. But not only this would be rather cumbersome, it also doesn't work, since there are endless ways of new macros (the list isn't finite, the macro names itself are generated on-the-fly....).
So, if such an edge case appears, I somehow need to circumvent the failing of the object and instead use some kind of generic placeholder, so it's clear to the user: "Help, I need a special macro here!"
AC 23–24 [ger]
| Win 10
| Developer of the GDL plugin for Sublime Text
«Furthermore, I consider that Carth... yearly releases
must be destroyed»