Header Strings enhancements about nifskope HOT 5 CLOSED

You're reading my mind, just finished up helping a user with this issue about 10 minutes ago. Was thinking about a way to auto-resolve this. Could add an verification step when this attribute is updated, much in the same way array lists resize, running through blocks to check if there are missing or redundant strings

from nifskope.

Then I will track this one ._.

from nifskope.

@L0FKA Sorry. Did not mean to offend. :)

I had mentioned it in this ticket, and decided to rename and reorganize this ticket today to include several other issues as well.

Please submit anything you can think of, bugs, feature requests. I couldn't understand exactly the last part of your ticket (reverse animation), but feel free to submit it as a separate ticket. If you do create issues try to include only related issues in one ticket. The animation request and header strings issue weren't really related.

Thank you for contributing.

from nifskope.

I'm refraining from creating a ticket for this, because I am unsure of the direction editing header strings is going to take, but I will post this here for now:

I noticed that when I click on "TXT" I get the index for the header string, and the spinbox to cycle through the numbers. It allows you to enter a number > the number of actual strings for one. This acts the same as entering the last header string index. Meaning if you enter "50" and there are 3 strings, it acts as if you entered 3.

Also, when you click away from the field, the number remains, and the spinbox remains. Meaning it doesn't "complete" the edit. To complete the edit you must click back inside the field and hit Enter.

So, these are technically bugs, but they may be resolved with whatever changes we make anyway.

from nifskope.

Two possible options,

1. Allow direct editing of the text, creating a new string if one does not already exist and if one does using that block number.
2. Dropdown selection of Strings from header.
3. Both.

I agree the above should warn the user upon entering values which are not valid.
Also I know some nif's define max string length, but not sure if that value is updated should a new string of len() > max be defined.

from nifskope.