Adds NodeProcessingStatus by g-abilio · Pull Request #6 · fabns-nano/nodeeditor2 · GitHub
Skip to content

Adds NodeProcessingStatus#6

Merged
g-abilio merged 23 commits into
masterfrom
node_processing_status
Oct 20, 2025
Merged

Adds NodeProcessingStatus#6
g-abilio merged 23 commits into
masterfrom
node_processing_status

Conversation

@g-abilio

Copy link
Copy Markdown

This PR adds the node processing status dynamic that was present in nodeeditor v1. It has now been updated to seamlessly adapt to nodeeditor v3. It also contains an example to illustrate this updated dynamic.

@g-abilio g-abilio requested a review from tatatupi July 18, 2025 15:05

@tatatupi tatatupi left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The icon is too small:

Image

And I didn't understand why you included the struct NodeProcessingStatus inside the NodeDelegateModel. I removed it from it, leaving the struct at the same "level" as NodeValidationState.

However, I don't know if it needs to be a struct, as the Validation State, and not directly an enum class. Why did you choose the struct?

@tatatupi

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@g-abilio g-abilio requested a review from tatatupi September 15, 2025 17:50
@tatatupi

Copy link
Copy Markdown

The UI is better, but the example is not yet very good.
Computation nodes (e.g., division, multiplication) should default to an empty icon.

I also do not understand the logic behind random generation. Sometimes it throws an error. Sometimes it doesn't.

The image shows a processing icon for a node that has empty input.
Nodes with empty input showing a valid icon
And a node with an error showing a valid icon.

We should have a very functional example before suggesting a PR.

image

@tatatupi

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Other examples are also displaying the processing status when they shouldn't.
As we talked, the default option should omit the processing status functionality. It should be optional for the developer to implement it or not.

image image

@g-abilio

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@g-abilio g-abilio merged commit 21b55ac into master Oct 20, 2025
3 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants