Matrix not returning 'widgets' prop

Community Usage questions
1

In 1.9.7, if I try to get the 'widgets' prop from a matrix of clone objects, it returns an empty array.

2

what about installing the latest version 1.9.9 ?

3

I can try soon, though when I updated a few days ago, 1.9.9 broke some other stuff.

4

I can confirm this is still broken in 1.9.9

5

Getting the widgets property of a widget with getProp or @{} has never been expected to work. The documentation fails to indicate it though.

Please report if you find bugs in the latest version.

6

This begs the question....how can I get the widgets of a matrix device in script then? Getting the 'widgets' property for a panel via 'getProp' seems to work just fine btw.

7

The matrix widget doesn't have a widget property. What do you mean exactly by "get the widgets of a matrix" ? If you mean retrieving all their properties in one go, then it's not possible. You can however use get(), getProp() on them if you know which id to target.

8

So, let's say I have a matrix of clone widgets; the template widget has ID 'template'. Inside the matrix, there are 4 clones. If I wanted to get properties of the 3rd clone inside the matrix, would I address the call to 'template3'? I'm not sure how the ID's are dynamically assigned inside a matrix.

9

Hi, i have no Matrix anymore in my project, according to the docs:

Note: unless overridden, children inherit from the matrix' id and osc properties ( id and address are appended with /$ )

it would be "template/2" -> starting from 0 (that is for regular buttons for clones i am not sure).
When dealing with normal clones you reference the cloned widget and set at least props.id in PROPS.
When you do:

{
var props = {
}
props.id = #{ $} //without space before dollar
return props
}

your clones get id 0 - 3, maybe then you could do "template/2" ?

Did not try that, hope this helps.

10

The clone widget is a wrapper for the actual clonned widget, which has its own id, that can be defined with the clone widget's props.id.

11

ah ok that makes sense. thanks Jean.