One of the issues right now, when creating modules, is that the inputs and outputs get assigned generic names ie in0, in1, out0, out1. This is obviously not very descriptive. If you combine a set of nodes into a module, you might not even know which input is which.
One solution is to allow renaming ins and outs for modules. However, that still has the problem that you might now know which in/out is which when renaming them. So I was thinking, maybe the better solution is to allow renaming ins/outs not just for modules, but for every type of node. That way, before you group nodes into a module, you could rename their ins/outs. Then, when creating the module, it would use the in/out names of the nodes for the in/out names of the module. This would fix the problem of being able to figure out what is what 🤔
One of the issues right now, when creating modules, is that the inputs and outputs get assigned generic names ie
in0,in1,out0,out1. This is obviously not very descriptive. If you combine a set of nodes into a module, you might not even know which input is which.One solution is to allow renaming ins and outs for modules. However, that still has the problem that you might now know which in/out is which when renaming them. So I was thinking, maybe the better solution is to allow renaming ins/outs not just for modules, but for every type of node. That way, before you group nodes into a module, you could rename their ins/outs. Then, when creating the module, it would use the in/out names of the nodes for the in/out names of the module. This would fix the problem of being able to figure out what is what 🤔