[RequiredField] or alternative for ValueInput

[tournesolParticipant]

Hiya !
We find it very useful to use [RequiredField] on BBParameters to make sure designers are properly warned when they forget something.

I was wondering if something similar existed for ValueInput ? Because it seems [RequiredField] doesn’t work on ValueInput perhaps I am using it wrong ?

Is there a bool value I can set in the RegisterPort method perhaps that would force the designer to either link the input to another ValueOutput or field the value by hand ?
myValueInput.required = true;

I know it would work only on nullable types but this would go a long way.
Also I am running a 2 years old flowcanvas so perhaps that feature has been implemented later on ?
Thanks.

[GavalakisKeymaster]

Hello,

The [RequiredField] does indeed not work with ValueInputs. To be honest, I haven’t thought of adding something similar for ValuePorts. Is the goal to show some UI error for example? I could make the [RequiredField] work on ValuePorts (and/or a way to set a ValuePort to be required in the RegisterPorts method).

Let me know.

Thanks!

[tournesolParticipant]

Something like that that would seem perfect thanks ^^

Just making it work in the same way the BBParam works would go a long way, especially for designers.

In the example below because the ValueInput is not fielded nor connected I would expect it to be red like the BBParam is.
[attachment file=”ParameterValidation.jpg”]

The red would disappear when the connection happens or if the field has a value:

[attachment file=”ParameterValidation2.jpg”]

Also it seems important that if a Required field is not set in the node then the node should also show up a red sign, similar to what behaviour trees are doing:

[attachment file=”ParameterValidation3.jpg”]

[tournesolParticipant]

I could make the [RequiredField] work on ValuePorts (and/or a way to set a ValuePort to be required in the RegisterPorts method).

I am not sure which one would be best, perhaps both? I know that having [RequiredField] work across the board is more intuitive 😀
Perhaps the second solution is only useful if the first is not possible ?

[Author]

Posts