Generated file structure and file patching

What do you want to achieve?

I want to understand why files that used to be generated under /libraries/ui/src in my arduino project (eg libraries/ui/src/images and assorted .c files) are now being generated under libraries/ui/ after I added a second screen.

Also, I’d like to understand if the generated ui.h file is updated (eg edited in place) on a change in studio and generate cycle or completely regenerated from scratch.

What have you tried so far?

Nothing, I have no explanation.

Screenshot or video


  • SquareLine Studio version: 1.3.0
  • Operating system: Linux
  • Target hardware: STM32 Arm - Arduino

Actual is 1.3.4 and ui and other all generated files is on export generated from scratch except ui_events …

Thanks for the information, what I’d like to know is whether ui.h is re-generated on export or edited in-place. In other words, if I add a new screen, does it overwrite ui.h in entirety or does it insert the required new declararions into ui.h?

1.3.0 is the last release that didn’t have show stopping defects for me. As a result I decided not to take 1.3.4 due to the effort involved in dealing with the impact of the prior release problems on my project. Studio is very capable but the software quality has not been there recently. Do you know if 1.3.4 been tested any better than the previous releases?

All the files in the ‘ui’ folder are totally overwritten on export. (Except in ui_events.c where your function bodies won’t be overwritten.)
SquareLine Studio 1.3.4 have many improvements and bugs fixed. In case you still have issues please report them here at the forum.

1 Like

SquareLine Studio 1.3.4 have many improvements and bugs fixed

Is the QA process the same or has there been an improved level of testing for this release.

There were many fixes in the 1.3.4 version, you can see them in the ChangeLog at: Changelog | SquareLine Studio

I understand but you’ll appreciate that having experienced a set of very unreliable versions I’d like to understand whether the QA process has improved before committing hours of work to upgrade and test. I don’t think SquareLine really understands the amount of wasted time that’s created across its user base by a sequence of unreliable releases. It knocks its reputation which isn’t great marketing. If they did understand this there would be some statement about QA improvements.

We improved our QA further by involving more people in testing, detecting, reporting and fixing issues.

1 Like