I'm loving wire but am i missing something when it comes to Instances?
Every time i change the instance amount things unpatch themselves and i have to spend the next 5 mins working out where in the chain the number hasn't updated and where it's broken.
Can i link this number to an exposed INT?
This feels way more complicated than it needs to be for no good reason.
Wire - Instancing headaches!
-
bentodman93
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 19:07
- Location: Cardiff
Re: Wire - Instancing headaches!
Hi, Please join us on Slack.
This question has been asked several times there already
What you're after is called Dynamic Instancing and is not a feature, Yet.
Instancing is something that is currently set at the load of the patch, so if that number is changed, it will break any connection that is also listening for a set instance count. The ONLY exception I have found so far is Slices, Slices can drive their own instance count, but for anything else, right now, you'll need to hard code a set instance count and use only that. I'm hoping Dynamic Instancing will be on the the first updates we will get for Wire, but nobody really has a eta on it yet.
This question has been asked several times there already
What you're after is called Dynamic Instancing and is not a feature, Yet.
Instancing is something that is currently set at the load of the patch, so if that number is changed, it will break any connection that is also listening for a set instance count. The ONLY exception I have found so far is Slices, Slices can drive their own instance count, but for anything else, right now, you'll need to hard code a set instance count and use only that. I'm hoping Dynamic Instancing will be on the the first updates we will get for Wire, but nobody really has a eta on it yet.
-
bentodman93
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 19:07
- Location: Cardiff
Re: Wire - Instancing headaches!
The slack link seems to be broken. Have you got a working one?