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

Add support for nested vertical list in other vertical list or dictionary #36

Open
laicasaane opened this issue Dec 1, 2023 · 2 comments

Comments

@laicasaane
Copy link

laicasaane commented Dec 1, 2023

It is common in game developement to have nested vertical list to ease the workflow of game designers.

For example, an seasonal event CSV can have multiple packages, each package contains multiple rewards, and each reward can be a single item or multiple items. Splitting this kind of data into multiple CSV sheets would make it hard for the designer to track and compare their balancing between those data packages.

I wonder if it requires too much work to support nested vertical lists?

It's hard to promote the use of BakingSheet in my company. Currently I'm the only one use BakingSheet. But atm the game is in alpha stage and doesn't have complex data types. But every single product of my company will eventually need this kind of data at some point in the game's lifetime.

@cathei
Copy link
Owner

cathei commented Apr 25, 2024

Nested vertical list is not supported due to ambiguity of the structure. If the header looks like

Id Values
Row1 1
2
3

If the Values is VerticalList<VerticalList<int>> Values, it's not possible to determine how the list is structured. (This is simplest example but applies to any complex row.)

So that's the limitation of vertical list, this can be usually solved by separating the sheet and using references.

@laicasaane
Copy link
Author

Supposedly if I want to work on this, where should I look into?

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants