Select Handles operator doesn't remember preferences from previous call #119487
Labels
No Label
Interest
Alembic
Interest
Animation & Rigging
Interest
Asset Browser
Interest
Asset Browser Project Overview
Interest
Audio
Interest
Automated Testing
Interest
Blender Asset Bundle
Interest
BlendFile
Interest
Collada
Interest
Compatibility
Interest
Compositing
Interest
Core
Interest
Cycles
Interest
Dependency Graph
Interest
Development Management
Interest
EEVEE
Interest
EEVEE & Viewport
Interest
Freestyle
Interest
Geometry Nodes
Interest
Grease Pencil
Interest
ID Management
Interest
Images & Movies
Interest
Import Export
Interest
Line Art
Interest
Masking
Interest
Metal
Interest
Modeling
Interest
Modifiers
Interest
Motion Tracking
Interest
Nodes & Physics
Interest
OpenGL
Interest
Overlay
Interest
Overrides
Interest
Performance
Interest
Physics
Interest
Pipeline, Assets & IO
Interest
Platforms, Builds & Tests
Interest
Python API
Interest
Render & Cycles
Interest
Render Pipeline
Interest
Sculpt, Paint & Texture
Interest
Text Editor
Interest
Translations
Interest
Triaging
Interest
Undo
Interest
USD
Interest
User Interface
Interest
UV Editing
Interest
VFX & Video
Interest
Video Sequencer
Interest
Virtual Reality
Interest
Vulkan
Interest
Wayland
Interest
Workbench
Interest: X11
Legacy
Blender 2.8 Project
Legacy
Milestone 1: Basic, Local Asset Browser
Legacy
OpenGL Error
Meta
Good First Issue
Meta
Papercut
Meta
Retrospective
Meta
Security
Module
Animation & Rigging
Module
Core
Module
Development Management
Module
EEVEE & Viewport
Module
Grease Pencil
Module
Modeling
Module
Nodes & Physics
Module
Pipeline, Assets & IO
Module
Platforms, Builds & Tests
Module
Python API
Module
Render & Cycles
Module
Sculpt, Paint & Texture
Module
Triaging
Module
User Interface
Module
VFX & Video
Platform
FreeBSD
Platform
Linux
Platform
macOS
Platform
Windows
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Normal
Priority
Unbreak Now!
Status
Archived
Status
Confirmed
Status
Duplicate
Status
Needs Info from Developers
Status
Needs Information from User
Status
Needs Triage
Status
Resolved
Type
Bug
Type
Design
Type
Known Issue
Type
Patch
Type
Report
Type
To Do
No Milestone
No project
No Assignees
3 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: blender/blender#119487
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
No description provided.
Delete Branch "%!s(<nil>)"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
System Information
Operating system: Windows-10-10.0.19043-SP0 64 Bits
Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650/PCIe/SSE2 NVIDIA Corporation 4.6.0 NVIDIA 551.23
Blender Version
Broken: version: 4.0.2, branch: blender-v4.0-release, commit date: 2023-12-05 07:41, hash:
9be62e85b727
Worked: (newest version of Blender that worked as expected)
Short description of error
Operator preferences in Blender are saved after first use. You can change them in redo panel and next time you call that operator it uses those settings.
This doesn't work on Select Handles operator in Graph Editor. Every time it's called it resets properties and you have to change them again. It's impossible to set it to always only select right handles and depend on it.
Exact steps for others to reproduce the error
It will ignore your settings and will revert to default.
Thanks for the report. Can confirm.
Actually for "select handles" and "select keys", these properties are hardcoded: https://projects.blender.org/blender/blender/src/branch/main/scripts/startup/bl_ui/space_graph.py#L229-L230
We can remove them for "select handles" at least
This will cause some noise in following case:
If you call "select keys", it will set both handles to
deselect
. After this, calling "select handle" won't select either of the handle.So perhaps make sense to keep the current behavior intact.
One way to fix this is make separate operator for "select keys"
cc @nathanvegdahl @ChrisLend
@PratikPB2123 Indeed most logical would be to decouple those two operators, so that case you mentioned doesn't happen in practice. Otherwise current behavior isn't too practical. For mograph work I constantly needed to select right handles and deselect everything and it's quite difficult.
Right. For now you can use keymap like this as workaround:
Sorry for the delayed response on this!
So the issue is basically that there is a single operator
Select Key / Handles
that is quite flexible, and then the menu itemsSelect Handles
andSelect Keys
use that operator to create hard-coded actions. Conceptually, those menu entries are supposed to only do one thing, and they're just exploiting the existence of this more flexible operator to do that one thing.If you want different behavior, you can call the main
Select Key / Handles
operator directly, or make hot keys for it as suggested by @PratikPB2123This does make me think, however, that we should put the main
Select Key / Handles
operator itself in the menu as well.To expand on what I said above:
One of my assumptions in the design of this operator is that doing these sorts of quick-select actions is something that people will want quick hotkeys for, rather than calling an operator and then adjusting its parameters every time. So the intention was to create an operator that was flexible enough for people to create whatever behaviors they want for their own hot keys, etc., for the selection actions they do most often.
So if someone does "select left/right handles" often, they would use this operator to create hotkeys for those actions, rather than call
Select Handles
and adjust the parameters for left/right every time.I do acknowledge, however, that this isn't great if a user instead wants e.g. menu items for their specific custom actions, since it's a lot more involved for a user to create menu items than hot keys.
Yes, make sense to create custom keymap entry for different "handle/key selection" combination.
I think we can close this report.
Yeah, I think it's fine to close the report, since this isn't a bug per se and is working as designed.
Nevertheless, I think the feedback here from @nickberckley is valuable, and suggests there may be usage patterns we aren't accommodating well enough yet. So it's definitely something to keep in mind for the future.