Inspector : Make handling of downstream overrides consistent #6178
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
We were already allowing edits in a nominated EditScope even when there was a downstream override that would prevent you from seeing the result. This was communicated in the UI by an orange "overridden" background colour in the inspector cell, and a warning message in the editing popup window. But in "Source" mode we made no such allowance, meaning that you couldn't make an edit at source if it was overridden downstream, and the UI didn't even show you that it was overridden downstream. There was no background colour and a spurious message about the target not being in the history. We now treat "Source" mode the same as EditScope mode, allowing edits at source even when overridden downstream. Along with that the UI now also shows the overridden status in the background colour and shows the appropriate warning when editing. This commit bundles a couple of other things which might ideally have been separate commits, but which arose naturally while figuring out the implementation : - Consolidated some member data into a single `Result::m_editors` struct. This encourages everything to be initialised together, making the data flow a little clearer, and using `std::optional` to make it unambiguous whether we have initialised yet or not. - Adjusted the failure messages when an attempt is made to disabled a non-existent edit. Instead of directing the user to change edit scope and disabled a _different_ edit, we now just explain that there is no edit to disable. Fixes GafferHQ#6172.
johnhaddon
force-pushed
the
inspectorFixes
branch
from
a4a1107 to
a7c8103
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We were already allowing edits in a nominated EditScope even when there was a downstream override that would prevent you from seeing the result. This was communicated in the UI by an orange "overridden" background colour in the inspector cell, and a warning message in the editing popup window. But in "Source" mode we made no such allowance, meaning that you couldn't make an edit at source if it was overridden downstream, and the UI didn't even show you that it was overridden downstream. There was no background colour and a spurious message about the target not being in the history.
We now treat "Source" mode the same as EditScope mode, allowing edits at source even when overridden downstream. Along with that the UI now also shows the overridden status in the background colour and shows the appropriate warning when editing.
@tomc-cinesite, if you have any bandwidth you'd be welcome to take a look at this. Although as I explained just now, I think changes in between the Tom-era EditScopes and the current setup mean that there's a good reason we didn't do this originally, but must do it now.