Jump to content

Question - Why can't we see what's inside an object in inventory?


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 392 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

Weird question. Why is it we have to pull an object out of inventory into the world then open or edit to view its contents? Would it be difficult to have an option in inventory to open an object there or at least inspect its contents? I know a little about programming - is this a limitation of the server? Viewer? Protocol? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect because the inventory list is likely just a reference pointer.

It's a list of references to entries in the SL database and your access permissions thereof. It's likely not the actual objects. It's probably just an array of variables.

You need to instantiate an instance of a given entry in that array in order to have that bundle of variable 'exist' and be available to functions that that call on it and examine it.

(I should be calling this an 'object' but SL users think of an 'object' as an object... but in code it means basically a bundle of concepts that are somewhat 'logically self contained' - and I'm stating this very poorly because I'm trying to make it layperson comprehensible).

 

If I am right; until you rez it... it doesn't actually "exist" - it's just a block of data on what will exist once rezzed.

The rezzed item is an 'instance' (active copy) of that 'block of data'. A permission like 'no-copy' just means you can only rez one instance - and once rezzed it's removed from your list because it's now in a different list, and listed as yours to control or 'remove from the list for that region and put into your list of things you can rez'.

 

I'm phrasing all of this with 'if I am right' because while this is how these things would work in normal computer programming, SL is wonky and old and predates a lot of modern concepts - so much of what SL does is just... wrong and inefficient... and without knowing the internals of SL, I can't make the same assumptions about it I would be able to make about almost anything else in the modern world...

Edited by Pussycat Catnap
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/14/2020 at 3:09 PM, Pussycat Catnap said:

I suspect because the inventory list is likely just a reference pointer.

It's a list of references to entries in the SL database and your access permissions thereof. It's likely not the actual objects. It's probably just an array of variables.

You need to instantiate an instance of a given entry in that array in order to have that bundle of variable 'exist' and be available to functions that that call on it and examine it.

(I should be calling this an 'object' but SL users think of an 'object' as an object... but in code it means basically a bundle of concepts that are somewhat 'logically self contained' - and I'm stating this very poorly because I'm trying to make it layperson comprehensible).

 

If I am right; until you rez it... it doesn't actually "exist" - it's just a block of data on what will exist once rezzed.

The rezzed item is an 'instance' (active copy) of that 'block of data'. A permission like 'no-copy' just means you can only rez one instance - and once rezzed it's removed from your list because it's now in a different list, and listed as yours to control or 'remove from the list for that region and put into your list of things you can rez'.

 

I'm phrasing all of this with 'if I am right' because while this is how these things would work in normal computer programming, SL is wonky and old and predates a lot of modern concepts - so much of what SL does is just... wrong and inefficient... and without knowing the internals of SL, I can't make the same assumptions about it I would be able to make about almost anything else in the modern world...

There's literally no reason they couldn't "temp-res" the object or even access its contents via a secure channel using the proper permissions checks.

I'd imagine once they finally get _everything_ running on AWS they probably have an absolutely absurd list of ***** they want to add on to the game like this that having more powerful and extensive servers will offer them.

Or, considering its _second life_, they have nothing but stability and region crossing on the list of to-do and you wont see any new features for probably another 10 years. Literally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nikkesa said:

There's literally no reason they couldn't "temp-res" the object or even access its contents via a secure channel using the proper permissions checks.

A lot of folks seem to easily forget that this is all variables and instantations of blocks of data in the memory and CPU time of assorted servers in a datacenter and on datacenters on the cloud.

They seem to start thinking these are real objects, and a real inventory.

So they make odd comments like that, that... completely miss what's going on.

This is why I worked so hard in my first post to not call them what they're called in programming, objects. Because non-technical people confuse that with an object... and get jumbled about what rezzing involves.

an object... is NOT an object... it's an object.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the SL architecture, the only thing that can look inside an object seems to be a sim process. Rezzing an object is very complicated, and only having one copy of that code simplifies the system. User inventory is just a directory of names, UUIDs, and permissions, like a file system directory.

Only being able to examine objects in-world implies other limitations, too. Marketplace doesn't seem to be equipped to look inside an object. So Marketplace can't easily have a 3D web viewer, letting you see something in detail from any angle before you buy, or even much of anything that lets you see inside the box before you buy it. Fortunately we have temp demo rezzers in world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 392 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...