Animation: time offset slider #106520
|
@ -493,9 +493,6 @@ void ease_fcurve_segment(FCurve *fcu, FCurveSegment *segment, const float factor
|
|||
|
||||
void time_offset_fcurve_segment(FCurve *fcu, FCurveSegment *segment, const float factor)
|
||||
|
||||
{
|
||||
/* The factor goes from 0 to 1, but for this tool it needs to go from -1 to 1. */
|
||||
const float long_factor = factor * 2 - 1;
|
||||
|
||||
/* Two bookend keys of the fcurve are needed to be able to cycle the values. */
|
||||
const BezTriple *last_key = &fcu->bezt[fcu->totvert - 1];
|
||||
const BezTriple *first_key = &fcu->bezt[0];
|
||||
|
@ -511,18 +508,18 @@ void time_offset_fcurve_segment(FCurve *fcu, FCurveSegment *segment, const float
|
|||
for (int i = segment->start_index; i < segment->start_index + segment->length; i++) {
|
||||
this doesn't compile for me. C doesn't allow variable length arrays. you'd need to do this doesn't compile for me. C doesn't allow variable length arrays.
you'd need to do `MEM_callocN(sizeof(float) * segment->length, "Time Offset Samples");`
and at the end of the function `MEM_freeN(y_values);` so to not have a memory leak
AresDeveaux
commented
Why can I compile it? do I need to set something I haven't for When you say C doesn't allow variable length array, I'm not sure I follow. I thought by declaring an array with a fixed value, C could handle it. Isn't
Didn't know we could overshoot. Where is that set in the code, and how can I test it on the UI? In regard to the memory leak, should I be adding those types of lines to the other sliders too? Why can I compile it? do I need to set something I haven't for `make`?
When you say C doesn't allow variable length array, I'm not sure I follow. I thought by declaring an array with a fixed value, C could handle it. Isn't `segment->length` an unchanged value for that segment?
```
Also the slider currently allows an overshoot in the positive axis, but doesn't allow to go below 0.
When overshooting on positive x it doesn't loop infinitely as you'd expect
```
Didn't know we could overshoot. Where is that set in the code, and how can I test it on the UI?
In regard to the memory leak, should I be adding those types of lines to the other sliders too?
variable length arrays are a C99 feature, but I think Blender runs on a different standard. But honestly I can't find in the wiki where that is. A lot of the slider features are controller by the slider itself. You can see the shortcuts in the Status Bar variable length arrays are a C99 feature, but I think Blender runs on a different standard. But honestly I can't find in the wiki where that is.
A lot of the slider features are controller by the slider itself. You can see the shortcuts in the Status Bar
`ED_slider_allow_overshoot_set` allows you to change the behaviour
AresDeveaux
commented
Interesting! I didn't see those before. I tried overshoot in Interesting! I didn't see those before.
I tried overshoot in `time offset slider` and as you say, to the right it works as expected, but to the left stops at 0. I then tried the `ease slider`, the `neighbor slider` and the `default slider`, and all of them stop at 0. I could try to find the problem, but it seems the issue is not in my function but in the slider itself and that might be beyond my understanding at this point.
|
||||
|
||||
/* This simulates the fcu curve moving in time. */
|
||||
float time = fcu->bezt[i].vec[1][0] + fcu_x_range * long_factor;
|
||||
float time = fcu->bezt[i].vec[1][0] + fcu_x_range * factor;
|
||||
|
||||
/* The values need to go back to the ones at the other end of the fcurve
|
||||
* every time we get to the last or the first key. */
|
||||
if (time > last_key->vec[1][0]) {
|
||||
int offset_frame = fcu->bezt[i].vec[1][0] - fcu_x_range;
|
||||
time = offset_frame + fcu_x_range * long_factor;
|
||||
time = offset_frame + fcu_x_range * factor;
|
||||
delta_y = last_key->vec[1][1] - first_key->vec[1][1];
|
||||
}
|
||||
Sybren A. Stüvel
commented
(please read on to the end of the comment, I'm asking less of you than apparent at first sight) This code (adjusting the behaviour of Another way of making the same point: 'computing the modulo in an always-positive manner' is not the same job as as 'offsetting an fcurve segment', and thus it belongs in a different function. I think it would be best to add a function declaration to
The implementation can then be added to
Note that I've also used TL;DR: And yeah, then I figured that adding such a function would also require writing a unit test for it, and that's getting too much for this PR. So I just went ahead and implemented that. It's now in the _(please read on to the end of the comment, I'm asking less of you than apparent at first sight)_
This code (adjusting the behaviour of `fmod` to match what you need) shouldn't be here. The fact that you need to write it means that you need another modulo function that behaves correctly.
Another way of making the same point: 'computing the modulo in an always-positive manner' is not the same job as as 'offsetting an fcurve segment', and thus it belongs in a different function.
I think it would be best to add a function declaration to `source/blender/blenlib/BLI_math_base.h`, underneath `mod_i()`:
```c
MINLINE float mod_f_positive(float f, float n);
```
The implementation can then be added to `source/blender/blenlib/intern/math_base_inline.c`, again underneath `mod_i()`. Don't forget to make the parameters `const` in the function implementation (the surrounding code is old, and doesn't follow this new-ish style rule yet). Something like this likely works:
```c
MINLINE float mod_f_positive(const float f, const float n)
{
const float modulo = fmodf(f, n);
if (modulo < 0) {
return modulo + n;
}
return modulo;
}
```
Note that I've also used `fmodf()` here instead of `fmod()`. The latter works fine, but converts the `float` paramters to `double`, computes the `double` result, which is then put back into a `float` again. `fmodf()` just operates on `float` directly.
**TL;DR:** And yeah, then I figured that adding such a function would also require writing a unit test for it, and that's getting too much for this PR. So I just went ahead and implemented that. It's now in the `main` branch and you can replace the call to `fmod()` with `mod_f_positive()`.
|
||||
else if (time < first_key->vec[1][0]) {
|
||||
Sybren A. Stüvel
commented
Use Use `floor(x)` if you want to always round down (instead of to zero). That way you don't have to correct the result of the computation.
|
||||
int offset_frame = fcu->bezt[i].vec[1][0] + fcu_x_range;
|
||||
time = offset_frame + fcu_x_range * long_factor;
|
||||
time = offset_frame + fcu_x_range * factor;
|
||||
delta_y = first_key->vec[1][1] - last_key->vec[1][1];
|
||||
}
|
||||
else {
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -1134,6 +1134,8 @@ static int time_offset_invoke(bContext *C, wmOperator *op, const wmEvent *event)
|
|||
gso->modal_update = time_offset_modal_update;
|
||||
gso->factor_prop = RNA_struct_find_property(op->ptr, "factor");
|
||||
time_offset_draw_status_header(C, gso);
|
||||
ED_slider_is_bidirectional_set(gso->slider, true);
|
||||
ED_slider_factor_set(gso->slider, 0.0f);
|
||||
|
||||
return invoke_result;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
An offset usually is just, mathematically speaking, an addition of a constant value. So shifting all the keys into a certain direction. A comment below mentions "the wrapping point", which suggests that more is going on than just applying an offset.
This should be reflected in the name,. If that's not possible, at least it should be documented.