Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add ability to split sliders in osu! editor #19858

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Aug 26, 2022
Merged

Conversation

OliBomby
Copy link
Contributor

I added a feature which lets you split sliders into multiple parts. It synergizes particularly well with the merging feature i added earlier, so for instance you can split a part of the slider, transform it however you want, and then merge it back to the whole. For now you can only split on control points which have a non-inherited type and are not the first or last control point of the slider. It is theoretically possible to make a splitting feature which can split on any part of the slider body, but that would be more involved and I'm not sure how to design the UX for that. For now this is a simple useful addition to the editor.

osu._yXwUicVEn0.mp4

Comment on lines 278 to 298
// Turn the control points which were split off into a new slider.
var samplePoint = (SampleControlPoint)HitObject.SampleControlPoint.DeepClone();
samplePoint.Time = HitObject.StartTime;
var difficultyPoint = (DifficultyControlPoint)HitObject.DifficultyControlPoint.DeepClone();
difficultyPoint.Time = HitObject.StartTime;

var newSlider = new Slider
{
StartTime = HitObject.StartTime,
Position = HitObject.Position + splitControlPoints[0].Position,
NewCombo = HitObject.NewCombo,
SampleControlPoint = samplePoint,
DifficultyControlPoint = difficultyPoint,
Samples = HitObject.Samples.Select(s => s.With()).ToList(),
RepeatCount = HitObject.RepeatCount,
NodeSamples = HitObject.NodeSamples.Select(n => (IList<HitSampleInfo>)n.Select(s => s.With()).ToList()).ToList(),
Path = new SliderPath(splitControlPoints.Select(o => new PathControlPoint(o.Position - splitControlPoints[0].Position, o == splitControlPoints[^1] ? null : o.Type)).ToArray())
};

// Increase the start time of the slider before adding the new slider so the new slider is immediately inserted at the correct index and internal state remains valid.
HitObject.StartTime += 1;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Of note, I haven't finished reviewing this because of this code. I'm very unsure of how correct this is (for instance, the ControlPoint creation here has slightly different Time specification).

If possible I'd like to see this moved into a method inside Slider itself or something else. It doesn't feel like this is a great place to being this, and may lead to diverging implementations of the same "clone" logic going forward.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

the ControlPoint creation here has slightly different Time specification

I'm not sure what you mean by this. I saw that the sample control point should be 1 ms after the end of the slider, but internal updating stuff already makes it so that the sample control point is updated to this correct time. I did some testing however and noticed that the sample set of the splitted sliders do not get retained after a save and reload, so maybe something is indeed wrong with this code, but I don't know why this happens, I don't know enough about how hitsounds work in lazer. I tried to copy as much as possible from the convert-to-stream code.

If possible I'd like to see this moved into a method inside Slider itself or something else. It doesn't feel like this is a great place to being this, and may lead to diverging implementations of the same "clone" logic going forward.

Do you think a Slider needs a clone method similar to With() in HitSampleInfo?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I did some testing however and noticed that the sample set of the splitted sliders do not get retained after a save and reload, so maybe something is indeed wrong with this code, but I don't know why this happens

I now understand why this happens and it's just SampleControlPoint being broken, so I'm not gonna fix that in this PR.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I saw that the sample control point should be 1 ms after the end of the slider, but internal updating stuff already makes it so that the sample control point is updated to this correct time

Then why are the control point times even set in the code above? It just seems misleading as written if those lines aren't even doing anything and the values assigned there aren't even final.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ill remove those lines

@bdach
Copy link
Collaborator

bdach commented Aug 22, 2022

As a bit of an aside, should this split operation be permitted for sliders that have repeats? I feel like it doesn't work intuitively at all with sliders that have repeats, since the way it works is that it splits the slider into parts like in the simple case, but each part has the same number of repeats that the original slider had and it's just... wonky to me?

@OliBomby
Copy link
Contributor Author

As a bit of an aside, should this split operation be permitted for sliders that have repeats? I feel like it doesn't work intuitively at all with sliders that have repeats, since the way it works is that it splits the slider into parts like in the simple case, but each part has the same number of repeats that the original slider had and it's just... wonky to me?

Slider splitting and merging are operations which really only concern themselves with the shape of the slider path. The number of repeats is not relevant for this operation and it's treated as just another parameter of the slider.

var newSlider = new Slider
{
StartTime = HitObject.StartTime,
Position = HitObject.Position + splitControlPoints[0].Position,
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Related, but isn't splitControlPoints[0].Position always... zero? As I understand it, newSlider is the first part of the slider, not the second - so when would the first control point not be at (0,0)? It's confusing me as it looks like something you'd do when you wanted newSlider to become the second part of the slider rather than the first.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Slider control points are removed from the start of HitObject to create newSlider, so at that point splitControlPoints[0].Position is not zero. There is nothing that really forces the first control point to be zero.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

But that would imply that the Position of newSlider is not the same as the position of the original slider? How can this be if newSlider is supposed to be the starting segment?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

My explanation was not completely right. splitControlPoints[0].Position is zero on the first split, but it can split in multiple points at the same time. On the second split, the HitObject is missing some of the control points, so splitControlPoints[0].Position is not zero, and the HitObject.Position has not changed, thus HitObject.Position + splitControlPoints[0].Position is the actual starting position of the new slider. It accounts for the HitObject.Position not updating in the previous splits.

@peppy peppy self-requested a review August 26, 2022 09:50
@peppy
Copy link
Member

peppy commented Aug 26, 2022

@OliBomby I've made some minor changes just to help with my own understanding of how the process is working. Tests are still passing and I don't think I make any contentious changes so I'll go ahead with merge 👍 .

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants