Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Renaming nodes in scene tree pane causes unexpected edit box location #35876

Closed
Beechside opened this issue Feb 3, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #35893
Closed

Renaming nodes in scene tree pane causes unexpected edit box location #35876

Beechside opened this issue Feb 3, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #35893

Comments

@Beechside
Copy link

Godot 3.2 Stable

Mac OS Catalina 10.15.2

Description:
Renaming nodes in scene tree pane causes unexpected edit box location

Steps:
Select a node in the scene tree
Use cursor keys to select the another node
Press Return to edit node name
Edit box appears in top left instead of above the node name

Possibly linked to #8652

Rename box in wrong position

Minimal reproduction project:

rename test.zip

@Torguen
Copy link

Torguen commented Feb 3, 2020

It also happens in 3.2 stable mono win10 64

@YeldhamDev
Copy link
Member

Unable to reproduce this on Manjaro GNU/Linux.

@KoBeWi
Copy link
Member

KoBeWi commented Feb 3, 2020

This happens when a different node gets focused than currently selected one. Enter renames the focused node but name edit appears at selected node.

But it doesn't seem to be possible to focus non-selected node as using arrows will select nodes, so not sure how to reproduce.

EDIT:
Ok, nevermind. This does not happen only with 2D nodes. Other nodes don't get selected when focusing with arrows.
image

EDIT²:
Also there's this error

 core\object.cpp:1047 - Condition "!metadata.has(p_name)" is true. Returned: Variant()

probably from

Rect2 rect = s->get_meta("__focus_rect");

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

6 participants