[Suggestion] Conditional plugin parameters

[Trihan]

Description of the Feature:

• Plugin parameters with visibility depending on the value of another parameter e.g. a select type that only appears if a boolean parameter is "true".

Mockups:

Condition not met:

Condition met:



Why is this feature good?
This feature is great because of the following:

• Cleaner parameter interface; only what needs to be displayed will be
• Easier to incorporate parameter dependence: could have a "mode" dropdown that has different inputs depending on selection e.g. "picture" would have a parameter set to img/pictures, "face" would instead have one pointing to img/faces. Currently you need to include every option and trust that developers will fill them in correctly.

Possible issues with this feature?
Issues that might arise from this feature:

• Screwing up parameter conditions might result in some confusion as to why certain options aren't appearing (only an issue for the plugin developer)
• May not be easy to implement as it would require a live refresh of the parameter list when parameters change value

 

[TheoAllen]

I would vote yes, but I'm kinda pessimistic. For both the technical difficulties and the urgency of it (it isn't that urgent/necessary to make things work).

 

[Hudell]

YES.
I miss this so much.

 

[MakoInfused]

Awesome idea! I'd love to see this happen! It would also reduce the confusion for plugin users as to which fields they needed to fill out, versus which one's were optional.

 

[BurningOrca]

Yes, absolutely yes. How often have I struggeled with the decision on how to implement the parameters in order to make none of them really useless or confusing in case that and that option has been chosen in another parameter.

 

[Tsukihime]

YES.
I miss this so much.

Wait, it was a feature before?

 

[Aesica]

Absolutely. Several of my plugins have "enable/disable this set of features" with child plugin parameters associated with them. It'd be nice to just hide the child parameters if the user chooses to disable that section.

 

[Hudell]

Wait, it was a feature before?

No, I think I used the word miss in the wrong way. When working with the parameters I often wish this was a feature.