3 ms·
> are we sure node graphs are the best metaphor? Modifier stacks (like 3DS Max) give you 80% Worth noting that, generally speaking, a linear sequence of modifi
by halfcat 2y ago
> are we sure node graphs are the best metaphor? Modifier stacks (like 3DS Max) give you 80%
Worth noting that, generally speaking, a linear sequence of modifier steps is what we get as the output of a topological sort on a DAG.
Meaning, it is indeed simpler and easier to reason about if we just let the user define and manage that list, as opposed to building a graph which then produces that list.
It seems like both concepts can happily coexist, if the task runner just needs a list of tasks. Then any structure that can be transformed into a list can work (list, tree, graph), and then a “modifier stack generator” can transform a tree using a tree search, or a graph using a topological sort (or whatever algorithm is appropriate based on the kind of graph).
- andybak 2y agoNot all node graphs are DAGs - a lot of audio platforms allow cycles I believe. But I'm thinking more about how the user would want to interact with the system. The trouble with graphs is that they tend to nudge you towards spaghetti and they tend to force micromanagement of layout on you. Smart autolayouts alleviate this latter point somewhat but you also lose some of the semantic value that spatial organisation provides. Depending on the application you tend to most be doing "fan out" or "fan in" - most of the graph is a tree. "Fan in" is easy to handle in a stack. A modifier takes another stack as input. The other stack doesn't have to live somewhere different spatially - it can just be hidden and shown as needed. I just don't want to spend my time tidying up my graph and zooming in and out just to see things. Node graphs are probably responsible for a decent chunk of the sales of incredibly large monitors! I like to work on a small-ish laptop and I have the eyesight of a middle-aged man.