About visual scripting

I mention it a couple of times, Antares Universe has 1:1 maped every single class of Unity. So if You have a tool like that, how come it is worth 5 % of bp. Are you saying that all the classes of Unity are just 5% of the UE4?

And all those post about monitor rates? Are you dumping this tread? What that has to do with visual scripting?!
I think lot of UE4 lovers are on this tread...

 

O rly?

 

So..where do ya get the parts and which manufacturer is the best one to get them from and how do ya solder it, or do ya breadboard it or tie it together on a bench using no substrate and what is the purpose of the diagram and how do you make a ground. Great concept if you know what's cooking. You would have to be well read to implement it. Like I said, a contact is in technical english legalese and not pictograms because you cannot describe in proper legal detail what Force Majeure in the particular case is or a payment schedule based on various shipping modes, SWIFT windows, mandate percentiles or make reference to the tens of thousands of sections of UCC which are relevant to trade across borders. If yer gonna tell me UCC could be written in pictograms ...well..heh.. that would be a knee slapper. I stick hard by my original statement.

-R

 

I was on early beta of Antares.. Great stuff..but I also learned then that Visual Scripting is not for me.. Teo needs a good smacking around for trolling and trolling and trolling. I will bet he ain't as smart as he thinks he is.. Acts like script kiddie central IMHO.

 

Your broader statement "Pictograms and visual language do not offer precision, only conceptuality." is false in the two examples I gave, digital logic and ladder/relay logic. If your statement were true, then it's amazing that we've had 50 years of technology designed, modified and repaired using those visual languages.

Do you agree that digital logic is a visual language, and that language is precise?

 

I agree somewhat. I do Arduino development but without forum posts, spec sheets and reading and reading on what goes where, what not to hook up, what to beware of when trying various techniques to produce various output I would not be able to parse the diagrams to proceed with my permutations. So even looking at a circuit i can comprehend I still have to refer to the reading I had done to understand what is occurring in the circuit diagrams. The conceptuality/pathways are mapped with the conceptual diagrams but the precision necessary to execute the concept was derived from alot of reading to develop the precise circuit topology necessary to execute the original concepts to be able to use the various Arduino boards and shields. Once I breadboard all the Arduino modules together and add the xener diodes and input/output jacks and want to get custom circuits built using the various microcontrollers, sensors, triggers and data relay circuits together to get to the manufacturing stage I will have to produce a circuit diagram, but I will still need to communicate to the manufacturer how to lay it out for my purposes so I get precisely what is needed at the correct size for the purpose of the products to be manufactured. In this case the circuit diagrams avoid me having to be too verbose in the explanation of how the circuitry is routed but both myself and the engineers at the electronics manufacturer had to read reams of material to come to an understanding of what the heck it means. So the diagrams act as shorthand replacing the verbosity of attempting to explain the circuit topology.

Another example is a Conan The Barbarian graphic novel. I could easily get the gist of a story if an artist like John Buscema handled the drawings but to get the precise story the word balloons, thought balloons and panel headers and footers would be needed to understand the details in depth enough to get the storyline understood beyond what is occurring with the drawings panel by panel. In this case the drawings are the conceptual part and the precision is offered by the scripted storyline wording.

 

Again, you are introducing a bunch of non-language problems into the question of "can a visual language be precise". I don't think you can seperate the language from the entire process as you practice it.

Zener diodes for voltage limiting, breadboards, manufacturing, etc. You are concerned with the entire process, from learning the language of digital logic to the hardware you use to prototype to the final manufacturing process. You even include communicating with the manufacturer as part of the discussion on visual languages. That's a big jumble of stuff. I imagine that you have a similar way of thinking about games and typing all of your code is just an inseperable part of the jumble for you.

 

The diagrams are only a part of the process and as it were, the conceptual part. For precision the rest of the language equation brings a great deal to bear on the process that is considered as the diagram means little by itself except for conceptualising the circuit topology. It acts as a map for the process of configuring the inputs and output of the components in use but is not the process. I cannot know what the topology does precisely without the background provided by the precision of the technical language on which the concept of the circuit diagram is presenting pictorially. It, by itself, does not help me reach the end product of which this is only one of many parts of the map needed to navigate through to that conclusion. I cannot look at the diagram and know it's purpose unless familiar with the technical side of the whole shebang which precision I gain through the tech specs, knowing what the tech specs refer to and how they affect the issue. In short the diagram is simply a conceptual shorthand as is visual scripting. In the visual scripting I have used such as node based compositing editors, shader trees or Unity plugins such as Visio or PlayMaker I still have to refer to my technical knowledge base which I use words to have understood and the visual output to get a grip on exactly what is occurring under the hood of the node hookups.

 

I stopped using it after one whole week of having headaches (trying ot make sense of it). I went to research an alternative and found uScript (http://u3d.as/content/detox-studios-llc/u-script-visual-scripting-tool/2fc). For me uScript we easier to learn. Within a week I was comfortable with it enough to buy the license (they have a free version as well).

Three months later, all my coding needs come from uScript (matter of fact, I even have some tutorials on their forum and I'm writing a couple more). I will agree at times it can't do what I want, therefore, I attempt to write the code by hand or ask for help with the code. In the three months I've been using uScript, I will admit that visual scripting at times complicates a simple commands (like a loop or toggle command), but that's why being able to write code at times is essential.