Expression in slider request

Would it be possible to have a switch for sliders (in right click edit menu) to not display the result of an expression entered into it on the slider, but instead display the original input settings?

That would make it possible to create a slider that shows from 0 to 360 to the user and put Rad(x) in as an expression so that it outputs in radians... Or x/2 so that you input diameter, but it outputs radius...

You've probably already had this request, it's certainly not mission critical, but I thought I'd throw it out there. I guess the slider might also need a star to indicate that there is an expression in there that is not visible to the user...

--Mitch

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mark on February 26, 2013 at 8:07am

Definitely a needed feature!

I honestly can't see the point of displaying the result. It's a blind input....

Hopefully it will have an option.

Permalink Reply by David Rutten on March 3, 2013 at 3:22am

Well obviously the point of displaying the result is that you can see what value you're actually setting. If you want your slider to have only multiples of three, you'd set it to Integer and then add an expression for slider*3.

Can someone give me a situation in which is makes more sense to see the input rather than the actual slider value?

David Rutten

david@mcneel.com

Poprad, Slovakia

Permalink Reply by Dedackelzucht on March 4, 2013 at 1:49am

I see the point of displaying the result. In my case I always use the rad component to see the degree input in stead of make the expression rad(x). But I think it is a good example. For most users the degree input information is the information which is availible. Maybe in some way both informations can be displayed?

Bets Regards

DeDackel

Permalink Reply by David Rutten on March 4, 2013 at 5:31am

I still think this would cause as much confusion as it solves. As mentioned, the insertion of a Rad component very obviously solves the degrees/radians conundrum, as would the Degrees option on any angle parameter.

What I worry about is the sharing of files containing sliders with (hidden) expressions that cause a mismatch between what number is visible and what number is generated. Someone who isn't well versed in the GH expression language will be mightily confused by this discord. So at the very least both numbers would been to be shown as per your last image.

I'm still unconvinced this is a good option, however allow me to propose a different solution. How about, while the mouse is down over the slider grip, a little tag is drawn over the slider with the original number inside of it? This way the two numbers are always visually close to the grip and there's no additional option required. By prefixing the temporary tag with "Original:" or something it should also be clear what the two numbers mean.

David Rutten

david@mcneel.com

Poprad, Slovakia

Permalink Reply by Dedackelzucht on March 4, 2013 at 5:48am

I like your propose...

Thanks David

Permalink Reply by David Rutten on March 4, 2013 at 6:36am

Though I still feel that it would be preferable to just have a degree slider and compute the radians sometime in between the slider and the angle parameter.

David Rutten

david@mcneel.com

Poprad, Slovakia

Permalink Reply by Mark on March 4, 2013 at 9:06am

Brilliant! The "Original" Tag is very useful and at the same time eliminates confusion of what it is happening.

If you can... Thank you.

Permalink Reply by David Rutten on March 4, 2013 at 9:13am

Already done, that wasn't a photoshopped image, it's a screenshot.

David Rutten

david@mcneel.com

Poprad, Slovakia

Permalink Reply by Mark on March 4, 2013 at 9:41am

Thank you very much David.

Permalink Reply by Mark on March 4, 2013 at 4:43am

For example, we use finger sizes (3 to 13) in jewelry design as an input, diamond sizes in mm, metal weight conversions and all kinds of known inputs to be then manipulated by a formula.
Yes we can still use a component to obtain the desired results but since there is the elegant possibility to use it internally in the Slider we try to do that, but in most cases, the input is "blind" due to the fact that is not recognizable if the formula is more complex than the example with numbers in the multiple of 3, in which case, it is actually better the way it is now, showing the immediate results.
So yes, it could be optimal to have a choice to show either the input or the formula output with perhaps a checkbox in the edit window.
Actually, more then optimal, it would be great!
Thanks for the replay David.

Permalink Reply by Jon Mirtschin on March 4, 2013 at 10:23am

One other comment, what's your thoughts on the idea to "reverse" the expression when typing in a value to set the slider?

For example, I have an expression 4*x so that slider has a multiple of 4. But if I double click and set the value to 8, it might be nice if the underlying slider value was set to 2 ( 8/4 = 2) rather than then the output being altered to 32. A visual clue as you've already done to remind the user there is an expression applied will help.

I do see the value to set does "change" from output at the moment, but still might be confusing for users of the document other than the original creator.

Permalink Reply by David Rutten on March 4, 2013 at 11:00am

Harsh. It will be quite tricky to find the slider position that best approximates a given result. I suppose a divide and conquer search would be feasible and fast enough so as not to cause noticeable delays.

David Rutten

david@mcneel.com

Poprad, Slovakia