Add OnDestroy to planes and task executors

Question

question

Gui Vaccaro asked Jan 22 2025 at 4:42 PM Gui Vaccaro commented Feb 06 2025 at 2:38 PM

Add OnDestroy to planes and task executors

Hello,

please see the attached example. Despite OnDestroy events have been added to all objects, when a plane is deleted, only the one added to the shape is executed. Is there a proper way to add OnDestroy events to the other objects, please?

OnDestroyExample.fsm

Thank you.

Software Version:

FlexSim 25.0.2

taskexecutor plane ondestroy

ondestroyexample.fsm (76.5 KiB)

______

Cookie preferences

Your privacy is important to us and so is an optimal experience. To help us customize information and build applications, we collect data about your use of this site.

May we collect and use your data?

Learn more about the Third Party Services we use and our Privacy Statement.

Strictly necessary – required for our site to work and to provide services to you

These cookies allow us to record your preferences or login information, respond to your requests or fulfill items in your shopping cart.

YES

Improve your experience – allows us to show you what is relevant to you

These cookies enable us to provide enhanced functionality and personalization. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we use to deliver information and experiences tailored to you. If you do not allow these cookies, some or all of these services may not be available for you.

YES

NO

Customize your advertising – permits us to offer targeted advertising to you

These cookies collect data about you based on your activities and interests in order to show you relevant ads and to track effectiveness. By collecting this data, the ads you see will be more tailored to your interests. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.

YES

NO

Are you sure you want a less customized experience?

We can access your data only if you select "yes" for the categories on the previous screen. This lets us tailor our marketing so that it's more relevant for you. You can change your settings at any time by visiting our privacy statement

Your experience. Your choice.

We care about your privacy. The data we collect helps us understand how you use our products, what information you might be interested in, and what we can improve to make your engagement with Autodesk more rewarding.

May we collect and use your data to tailor your experience?

Explore the benefits of a customized experience by managing your privacy settings for this site or visit our Privacy Statement to learn more about your options.

Answer 1 · 2025-02-05T19:07:42Z

Jason Lightfoot answered Feb 05 2025 at 7:07 PM Gui Vaccaro commented Feb 06 2025 at 2:38 PM

In your OnDestroy code you can add:

forobjectlayerunder(c)
     nodefunction(OnDestroy(a));

I'm curious why you need this though - group lists should automatically get updated when destroying objects which may provide some features you're looking for.

You can also create couplings to the objects under a container/folder node such that it effectively contains a list of object pointers - these are removed when the other end of the coupling is destroyed - keeping your list correct. This is how connections are maintained in the base objects and is a technique employed in numerous areas (e.g. process flow membership)

· 3

Gui Vaccaro commented · Feb 06 2025 at 1:20 PM

Hi, @Jason Lightfoot ,

if the purpose of a container is to represent a 3D object which combines multiple objects, it could make more sense: the container has labels, so it would be expected that their initial and final states could be controlled by the container itself. This actually extends to the "onresettrigger".

One can, of course, create all logic on the triggers of one of the embedded objects, but it is just not natural, and violates the OO concept of encapsulation, for those that still like that paradigm.

In the example I sent before, the overall idea is to be able to remove a group if it is empty. As the groups are named based on labels provided by the user (e.g., a team's name), removing empty groups becomes good housekeeping and reduces effort for debugging.

I hope I could explain better why my suggestion was made.

Thank you.

0 ·

Jason Lightfoot ♦♦ Gui Vaccaro commented · Feb 06 2025 at 1:40 PM

I think we need to look at what you're trying to accomplish and start talking about specifics. I agree there are a number of non-OO compliant aspects of the user experience of FlexSim, but we usually are able to get the behaviours we want and often in a way that has good structure that can be both generic and managed.

0 ·

Gui Vaccaro Jason Lightfoot ♦♦ commented · Feb 06 2025 at 2:38 PM

Hi, @Jason Lightfoot , thank you.

The expectation is that each embedded object should take are of their own initialization and destroying procedures. Again, it is just modularity and encapsulation. Having to call explicitly the destroy for embedded/underlayer objects might give the impression of "savig time" when the call is not needed, but in fact the impact on performance is almost neglectable, even in C# based environments. It also makes the code unnecessarily convoluted, as either the parent object has to deal with the "garbage" of the underlayer objects, or the behaviors are not the expected from an OO environment.

Anyway, I now know (as it is not explicit in the help/manual) the I have to manually handle that.

Thank you for your interest!

0 ·

question