View Full Version : Bones Bug

Adrian Lopez
02-27-2003, 12:09 AM
I've found a bug in Layout's Item Properties panel for bones: If the current bone's Weight Map is changed to "(none)" while "Use Weight Map Only" is selected the bone will no longer behave as expected. For the bone to work properly it is necessary to disable "Use Weight Map Only" before changing the current Weight Map to "(none)". The problem is most obvious when you change the weight map to "(none)" when "Use Weight Map Only" is selected but "Weight Normalization" is not.

I've also noticed that Layout doesn't update the viewport when a bone's Weight Map is changed in the Item Properties panel (I get around this by reselecting the current falloff setting).

I'm getting tired of finding bugs in Lightwave, especially given NewTek's lax attitude toward bugfix releases. I'm getting close to chucking the whole thing out the window :mad:.

02-27-2003, 11:12 AM
I know this is a loaded question but..
Did you report it?

Adrian Lopez
02-27-2003, 01:51 PM
Why report it. Doesn't NewTek staff read these forums?

02-27-2003, 02:04 PM
I suppose.

Adrian Lopez
03-07-2003, 03:07 PM
I'm writing to report that the bug is still present in Lightwave 7.5b. Perhaps I should have reported the bug directly to Newtek as PeterJ suggested. I'll bet this won't be fixed until 8.0, which is sad. Oh well.

03-10-2003, 11:40 PM
It could be that they just haven't received any information on this extremely *exotic* bug. Seems to me you'd only encounter this bug every once in a while. By saying this, however, I do not mean to discount your arguement. It ALSO seems to me that they're getting paid pretty well to issue seemingly small bug fixes. Anyway, not much on the forum about this. What other bugs have you encountered?


Adrian Lopez
03-11-2003, 08:54 PM
Originally posted by tcgolom
[BIt ALSO seems to me that they're getting paid pretty well to issue seemingly small bug fixes.[/B] Huh? Are you suggesting that programmers who are well paid need not bother issuing small bug fixes, because it's somehow beneath them? If a bug is easy to fix then why delay release of a bugfix patch?

Other bugs I've found are Layout crashes on Clear Scene (http://vbulletin.newtek.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=389) and Modeler's "recent files" menu fails on long filenames (http://vbulletin.newtek.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=527). Neither bug is very significant, but they don't exactly leave me with a good impression.

03-13-2003, 04:43 PM
That is not at all what I was trying to convey and I apologize for an extremely convoluted statement. It was my intention to say, as you have said, that these are very minor bugs and should easily be fixed. This should result in a more polished product. The company makes enough money off the sales of their products that this should be part of the design and release process. However, I don’t think that they have received enough feedback on these issues to warrant minor product glitches.
Now, I want to make it clear that I think, as I’m sure you do, they would benefit immensely when delivering a product that was without fault or without small errors that would be fixed easily with a downloadable patch. History has taught us otherwise, unfortunately. The biggest delinquent is, of course, Microsoft who has yet to release a piece of software without needing a *SERIOUS* patch or upgrade to maintain stability. So, if these were glaring mistakes that nearly rendered the software useless, then yeah, pooh-pooh to them. Bugs should not be overlooked by software companies, whatever the size. The infrastructure exists for them to gain information on these bugs through forums and email.
I agree that these things could possibly taint the software’s prowess in the market and in many user’s minds but I’m not one to let a couple small details ruin the experience of the entire package. If they choose not to address your concerns or anyone else’s, and the product becomes shoddy as a result, then it would be time to look at another software.

Still, I have encountered one bug related to the “font highlight” issue and quickly resolved it through the answer of a user in the forum community (I think it was actually posted as an FAQ). In any case, if it so bugs you and you want to continue to use the program, you can do one or all of the following:

1) keep writing them until they acknowledge it’s existence and decide to issue a fix
2) ignore it and hope that it doesn’t gain further ground in your sub-conscious
3) download the SDK and try and write the code to fix it yourself and, if you are generous or so inclined, share it with the company and the forum.

I’m curious what their response was, if any. Keep me posted. I’d like to know how this pans out.

Good luck,
Tony :D

03-21-2003, 11:05 PM
Guys, I am LightWave commercial plug-ins programmers, and one thing I can say - in the every plug-in we are creating we are founding at least couple LightWave bugs (ussually more important than what you described)... I know, that's sad, but in the so big application as LightWave, it's unavoidable.

Could you believe that in the at least LightWave v7.0 MasterHandler (and probably LayoutGeneric too, but I didn't test this) plug-in issue command Surf_RemShader which is supposed to remove specified shader from surface, it's removing just from user interface, and LightWave keeps executing PixelShader call-backs?

When I found it I could not believe it for a couple of days. I felt like somebody would hit me in my head...

Switching to other 3D application is not an options, there is no perfect programs. I would recommend so extreme option just when LightWave would crash in the main loop every couple minutes or even more often, but from what I experienced it has no (hopefully) such bugs.