Iterative save... Please?

New releases and general discussions.

Post » Sun Feb 14, 2010 3:11 pm

OK, so why not enable autobackup with 999 backups or something? Or I suppose you'd prefer the kind of workflow where you edit your application saving normally, and at the end before closing save a new version?
Scirra Founder
B
359
S
214
G
72
Posts: 22,946
Reputation: 178,478

Post » Sun Feb 14, 2010 3:21 pm

[quote="Ashley":jhkrvxs8]Or I suppose you'd prefer the kind of workflow where you edit your application saving normally, and at the end before closing save a new version?[/quote:jhkrvxs8]

Not before closing - right in the middle of it! If you have 999 auto-backups - do you remember in which one you changed what? Not likely. But if you were working on, say, _003, saved it, then started working on something else, which was saved as _004 you'd remember that _003 had THAT THING which you deleted in _004 or _005 or whatever and really need now.

In a way with iterative saving each previous version is like a template for your current version - a stable undo, a place of safe return. Sure, you can do it using Save As, but when it's quick and easy you do it more often, experiment more = better results.
B
19
S
6
G
6
Posts: 1,101
Reputation: 5,646

Post » Sun Feb 14, 2010 3:44 pm

[quote="Ashley":1451uf77]OK, so why not enable autobackup with 999 backups or something? Or I suppose you'd prefer the kind of workflow where you edit your application saving normally, and at the end before closing save a new version?[/quote:1451uf77]
I'm not a fan of autosave/autobackup, and I usually disable it in anything I use.
No reason why it can't be left in there for those that like it though.

My reason for wanting iterative save would be control.
Lucid hit upon what I mean when he said it's like a permanent undo point.
I like to save a new version when I've made enough progress to warrant it, like fixing a certain bug, or adding a certain amount of features, so I can always go back to that point if need be.

Krush.
B
2
S
2
G
3
Posts: 406
Reputation: 2,062

Post » Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:48 pm

Here's my argument for a manual iterative backup feature like the one Somebody is suggesting:

1. It gives you more control over when and why a backup is made. Backups aren't decided by an arbitrary means (in this case, time). This means that you don't have to wait for Construct to decide it's backup time, you can just hit a key and go.
2. It solves the problem of sifting through several .bak#.cap files to find the one you need if you want to revert to a previous version.

I think also that the backup numbering needs an upgrade. Currently it saves as bak1, back2, etc. But when listing these by name in Windows you get this:

bak1
bak10
bak11
bak2
bak3
...
bak9

I propose that the numbering scheme pads the number with extra 0s, such as bak001, bak002, so that they are listed in the proper order. Perhaps the number of zeros could be taken from the "Number of backups" field in the preferences.

The shortcut key Ctrl-B currently does nothing in Construct, this could create a manual backup. Also, you should be able to create a manual backup without having to turn on the Auto-backup feature.
Moderator
B
5
S
2
G
6
Posts: 4,348
Reputation: 10,971

Post » Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:53 pm

OK. I guess it would also be handy to specify a different backup folder, eg. to a thumb drive or other folder, so you don't get your working directory cluttered with backup files. However this will probably (like all other features) be postponed to post-1.0 or Construct 2 because we're really trying to focus on simply stabilising what we've got towards 1.0. It's unlikely we'll add any new features before then.
Scirra Founder
B
359
S
214
G
72
Posts: 22,946
Reputation: 178,478

Post » Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:56 pm

Fair enough :)
Moderator
B
5
S
2
G
6
Posts: 4,348
Reputation: 10,971

Previous

Return to Construct Classic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests