On 29 Apr 2010, at 16:36, Christopher Wright wrote: >> Ok, I have to admit I'm confused about "copied macros are clones". This is >> what happens with copy and paste already, no? Do you mean that Virtual >> Patches should all be distinct and editable in each qtz without changing the >> original virtual patch? > > I think what he means is this: You create Macro Foo. You then copy/paste it > (so you have 2 Foos). If you edit _either_ Foo, _both_ are modified (so in > essence, they're the "same" thing, instantiated in 2 places). Currently, if > you modify a macro that has copies (Not a virtual macro), you modify that > instance only. > > (if that's not the intent, please set us straight :)
yes. imho this will make authoring in qc much much simpler and faster for novices and power users alike. just make that the way qc works, and the mental overhead currently required in thinking about these things drops to zero. you wouldn't even need to provide the extra complexity of a 'break link' command, as you could just select all, copy and paste the contents of the macro into wherever else you want them (ie. an empty macro). and keep virtual macros the separate, largely hidden system-wide power user feature they are already. > -- > Christopher Wright > [email protected] _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Quartzcomposer-dev mailing list ([email protected]) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/quartzcomposer-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
