# [RFC] Unified fConnector instead of fInput / fOutput — what do you think?
#194
Replies: 2 comments 4 replies
-
|
Is this update will provide more flexibility. For example, is if I move a node from left to right connection will move opposite/closest side? Today I was thinking about current fix position experience. Fixed connection sides/input/output is not cover more possibilities. Yes current solution is fit for some designs but in my case everything is look messy. I think floating connection sides/points will improve visual satisfaction. Example from jsplumb library. Screen.Recording.2025-07-27.at.02.28.08.mov |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Hello, I would be a very good improvement ! Do you know when it will be live ? 😄 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Hey everyone! 👋
I’m planning to simplify the Foblex Flow API by removing the old
fInputandfOutputdirectives and replacing them with a single, more flexible directive —fConnector.🧠 Why
I recently added support for reassigning connections from both ends — not just the target side. This made the distinction between
fInputandfOutputmuch less relevant.You can now define the behavior using inputs instead of separate directives.
✅ New API
Here’s what the new
fConnectorlooks like:You can also control the side and direction:
And disable connection logic:
🔄 What will happen
❓ Question
Do you rely on the clear separation of fInput and fOutput in your templates?
Or does this unified version look cleaner and more useful to you?
Let me know your thoughts — especially before I remove the legacy directives! 💬
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions