Problem Description

This is not really a bug, just weren't sure where to post it. Sorry for that.

But just wondering if its on purpose that, it says "Check item exist" and then "Enter the name of the key to check if exists."

And in the event it self is says "Item" as well. And in the area you type it says key. Just think it might be a little confusing.

Anyway just a minor thing.

Construct 2 Version ID

r203

This is not to reopen it, but just to let you know if someone else report something similar.

The problem is that C2 doesn't "allow" using the same filenames. So to make "Load from url" work as if it was updating the image, you have to save all files with new filenames each time. Which can be done by using the UID of the object with an index variable.

So: [UID][Index],jpg

00.jpg

01.jpg

Next time you have to overwrite the current loaded image, you delete the 00.jpg and save a new one as 01.jpg

The only problem of course is that it will drain you computer for memory eventually.

But anyway that will work around it.

The updating of Nwjs to the none alpha solved this one as well. Perfect!!

Ok I was using the alpha 1 version 0.12.0 from that link, was the only want I could find. So updated to the 0.12.0 non alpha and that solved it. It now list them as it should. Most excellent...thanks a bunch

Ok fair enough, thanks for the reply anyway

[quote:1js2senf]The bug report guidelines are there to help you too! They exist because bug reports that don't follow them are generally completely useless, and we cannot do anything to help you. People very often do things like report a bug which is nothing but a screenshot of an error message.

Already having expressed my disappointment in how bugs reports are handled. I do however understand that you would like a Capx to test out things when bugs are reported.

However regardless of them adding a capx, the impression you get when bug reports are handled, is that its more a matter of getting them closed than looking into the report it self.

Just because a bug is closed or a bug report is not filled out as you would like them, doesn't mean that it have been solved. Its of great frustration to put together a bug report trying to highlight and explain exactly how and what is going on. To just see it being moved to the closed section as if that would solve it. In a lot of cases (speaking for my self), if the way to recreate the problem is to do 3-4 steps which takes less than a minute to do. Why should the bug report be closed? Even when a screenshot is applied showing that the capx doesn't contain anything other than a single event.

In other cases bugs are not as simple as they can be or would make sense if reported on there own, because they depend on each other. But again these are just moved to closed bugs section, because the bugs shouldn't be like that. Only one bug per report.

But if some actions lead to something else which causes the bug, and you as user don't know where things go wrong, you report it as you have experienced it. And if you during you test notice other things, then it makes perfect sense to report that as well, because how should you as user know whether that is relevant for the bug or not? But to you it might seem like a different issue, which I don't blame you for, but that doesn't mean that I know it and that I intentionally try to add as many bugs to one report as humanly possible, to just make things as complicated for you as possible.

The whole workflow of you just closing bug reports, could be compared to two people speaking on the phone.

Person 1: Expresses a problem

Person 2: I don't agree, its because you are not doing it correctly.

Person 1: But......(Person 2 hangs up.)

I think the general way that you handle bug reports are very ineffective. Instead of just closing them, it would be a lot better approach I think. To add a system of how you handle them, in the sense:

1. If you don't understand the problem / can recreate it.

Don't assume that the problem is solved by moving it to the closed section.

2. Write a reply to the person:

a. Based on your description in the report, Im not able to recreate the problem. Can you apply a Capx?, if there is none

b. I checked you capx and weren't able to recreate the issue you are referring to. <Ask for more information if possible>

c. I don't understand your description (Not all people speak English), can you try to elaborate the problem?

3. Finally

Don't close the reports as if it was solved or not relevant. Instead maybe wait 4-7 days and if the person making the report haven't answers to your comment then close it. People making these reports, simply write what they experience, not specifically where in the C2 code things are going wrong.

If you under no circumstances can recreate the problem, leave the bug report open to see if others might report something similar and write that you simply can't recreate it, but you will keep an eye on it and the person making it should as well or close it, but at least tell the person that you cant recreate it, after gathering as much information as possible. Following the 3 steps above.

And I fully agree that in a lot of cases I would also assume that some bug reports are due to bad code, but in that case simply ask them to provide a capx, if the problem or description in the bug report doesn't explain how to recreate it correctly or it is a more advance description etc. People adding bug reports doesn't do it to annoy you, but to help you. But the impression you get is that you would rather that people didn't based on the way you do it now, and that's sad I think

Sorry for adding this here, but this is seriously mind blowing, im completely stunned how problems with you program reported by your users are handle. Anyway doesn't bother reporting anything anymore. I added a CAPX, with the code stated in how to recreate the bug. Im using NW.js 0.12.0 found on your website.

Problem Description

Not really sure if this is a bug or not, so if someone could double check it, it would be great. But using NWjs Open browser doesn't seem to work for me.

If I preview it In Chrome or IE, it doesn't open the URL and no error is given, nothing happens.

In NWjs if I use a path like "C:\Users\" or an URL, I get the following error:

However in NWjs it does actually work in both cases. Even though it gives the error message.

Attach a Capx

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/109921357/Open%20url/Open_url.capx

Just add NWjs to a project and then use Open browser with an url.

As stated just above this is all the code in the program.

Description of Capx

Just opens an url using NWjs open browser functionality

Steps to Reproduce Bug

Observed Result

Gives error message. However works in NWjs, but not Chrome or IE

Expected Result

That it didn't give an error message.

Affected Browsers

• Chrome: (YES)
• FireFox: (Don't know)
• Internet Explorer: (YES)

(And NWjs)

Operating System and Service Pack

Windows 7

Construct 2 Version ID

r202

I can understand your point in that. However that argument only stands I think, if you know how many images you need. Meaning you are creating a non dynamic solution.

I did a small test.

Test 1:

3 instances all 256x256 with 3 frames, so each of them can load there own image.

Test 2:

3 individual objects all 256x256 with 1 frame each.

In both cases I tested them with a minimum amount of required frames. And if they should be able to hold 30 images each, the frames are just duplicates of the first frame without any images stored in them in this case.

The program looks like this, and the code for each test.

Each run I kept an eye on the memory used in Windows system management and noted the peak memory used in a 300 second period.

The combined memory use is calculated with the peak memory.

In both cases whether you use 3 instances or individual objects, the save of memory is only true if you know before hand how many images you need. The empty frames will use memory which is expected.

So in either case the most effective way of doing it as I see it, would be to only have the frames that your program actually need and not just a fixed amount.

But since that is not possible in C2 meaning you can't add frames as you need them, you are bound to waste a lot of memory if you do not know before hand whether 3 images would be enough or 30 images. You have to add at least the maximum amount of possible empty frames that you might need, and therefore could waste memory depending on the sizes etc.

Sorry for the messy Capx, I think I changed the one in the link as its from dropbox. So here is a clean one. Only with one issue, so this one focuses on:

"At no point can I see anything that looks like your "Example 1" screenshot, which returns a list of files separated by semicolons."

To be sure we are using the same structure for testing, could you make a test structure like so:

C:\Users\<Name>\Test folder
a.txt
C:\Users\<Name>\Test folder\Sub folder 1
b.txt
C:\Users\<Name>\Test folder\Sub folder 2
<No files in this one>
[/code:v2ocrh9n]

When I run the program and select "Test folder" I get the following results:
[img="https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/109921357/NWJS_several_folders/Results.png"]

Regarding the NWjs version:
I don't know where to find the version number, but I download the one from here: 
[url]https://www.scirra.com/forum/nw-js-formerly-node-webkit-news-and-update_t122727[/url]

New capx:
[url]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/109921357/NWJS_several_folders/NWjs_several_folders.capx[/url]

In general I agree with you and if you read some of my other bug reports I do think that I put a good bit of effort into making them. And in most cases I even create a simple Capx to show the problem, when I think its needed. Having posted and reopened and re-tested approximately 10-12 bug reports the last 14-18 days or so.

Having spend a lot of time trying to figure out whether I did something wrong in my code or not, to make or try to make work around, which there are lots of in my program already, and those haven't been added as bug reports. To creating small capx for almost all the bug reports, except maybe 2-3 so they could be uploaded here. writing bug reports for all 10-12 of then, including images showing where things go wrong. Adding it all together I have spend several hours doing all this.

Then I have to reopen one of them for the third time, because It was closed without being tested. And then to be "corrected" in how to make proper bug reports, because some people assume that the developers can't bothered to do 4 simple steps in there own program that takes 2 minutes? To be honest if that is to much to ask then I don't really give a damn, and they can close it if they want.

Cant believe I haven't found this plugin before now

It pretty much have everything I would expect it to have, to the point where it in my case will completely replace any use of C2s normal textbox and text objects at first look when just looking through it quickly.

I really hope you are still keeping an eye on this, because what I think would make it one of the absolute most useful plugins for C2 ever made. Would be if it had auto size.

An option like:

Auto size = None, Both, Horizontal, Vertical

Which would scale the textbox in the selected direction if needed.

Even though I love it, amazingly good plugin, should replace the normal text and textboxes in C2, if It wouldn't cause problems for a lot of projects

But you can use any Webm file, what if the video source I used was 250 mb or copyrighted material for someone else? Then I wouldn't be able to make a bug report? Im not trying to annoy anyone, im pointing out a problem, that is meant as a help to Scirra so they can fix it and thereby improve C2. It can be tested in 2 min by doing what I wrote in the original post using any video file. If they have no interest in fixing it, because they believe it is linked to my source file and don't want to spend 2 min setting up a project, then they can just close the bug report and then the problem will appear solved, that is perfectly fine with me, even though I wouldn't agree on handling bug reports like that.