You would, if you were an Apple engineer - its all about the art there 
Ever since I've been more on the leadership/management side this is how I often feel:
4 Likes
I use the virtual switch "placeholder" method when I remember. That works fantastic, but I sometimes forget and then, DOH! Usually can fix it. Sometimes it gets messed up and I just need to recreate it. NBD. However if there was a way to insert a virtual placeholder device for me instead of just telling me I broke it, that would be sweet. Then if I could just replace the proxy virtual device.
Disclaimer:
I'm a dreamer, not an engineer.
2 Likes
I have my bullpen I can go to at a moments notice.
5 Likes
So these are all virtual devices used expressly for this purpose? If so, that is a great tip. Tips like this need to go into a FAQ somewhere.
2 Likes
There's a list I made .. documenting the weird.. that I update from time to time.
3 Likes
Yes. I've been known to leave them in rules when worried a device might flake out on me. Last year, when August pushed bad firmware, it really saved me as I was constantly excluding the real locks just to get limited functionality.
1 Like
I have the same thing, but all in a virtual container.
2 Likes
I think you can just change it in conditions, and you will be good to go.
1 Like
Wrong, no. Is there a better way, usually. I only edit logic when it is wrong(ors, ands, parens). I edit conditions(manage/create conditions box)when I can.
The complex logic expressions in IF-THEN are made up of conditions, and logic operators. Edit the conditions at the bottom of the Actions page. When you edit the condition, it gives you the spot where the device is selected, so you can make a different selection. Device replacement in this context is not done by editing the action, but by editing the condition.
Yes, you were editing the action. You should have edited the condition that was in the IF-THEN to replace the device. When you created the IF-THEN in the first place, you created that condition. It is kept in the Manage or Create Conditions section at the bottom of the page.
That is what I thought for the longest time too. I thought I was going crazy somehow, it just didn't make sense.
And then one day, it all seemed to basically click. I still can't figure out some things like waits, but I can confidently write rules, edit rules, and replace devices within rules.
+1
Then you edit actions. I'm not a developer and this stuff has taken me some time to get my head around as well. I think your cup is too full and will simply overflow onto the floor unless you empty out the pre-conceived ideas about how this should work.
Last thing I want personally, as someone who doesn't know how to code, is to be forced to learn how to code to create automations, and I can't imagine any of the other people that also don't know how to write code want that either.
If you're a developer, why not just write your own app? Several developers here do that and don't use RM at all.
But you said you were just trying to change a condition, so there's a place for that. Yes you can do it the way you did, but in the example you replaced a condition with the same condition is what it appears to me. So then you looked at the conditions it appears, and deleted the condition that the rule was currently using, not the condition that was no longer being used.
It's not a type of scenario that one normally encounters.
Both ways do work, but the second is so much longer. It probably would make sense if you had a lot of conditions in there and you didn't want to re-write the entire expression, but the options are there. Use them if you wish or don't.
Method A (preferred)
Method B (really cumbersome, but works)
Nope. Just practice. I still screw up sometimes. I tried to create a ghost device, but I'm still able to delete it. If you can show @bravenel what you're doing precisely, step by step up to the point where the error occurs, and have a log open in another tab to capture anything that might be helpful, then perhaps this can be resolved for you.
I’m sure you’ll like it. Many here have good things to say about it. Enjoy
4 Likes
RM should really lock out certain actions that can "break" rules. One simple example for the longest time there was not even a warning for using the "app list" button that it can break the rule, instead of using done. Thankfully there is now a warning at least. But why even have the "app list" option when using RM at all, if there is such a risk in breaking the rule?
2 Likes
