jem

@mugga, the easiest way to manage clones is to maintain their names on a list. You can then write a function to delete all or some of the clones.

There is a problem with your puzzles. You are cloning an object, but you are not recording the cloned object’s name anywhere. Without the clone’s name, you will struggle to delete it.

The clone object puzzle is a function that returns the name of the new cloned object. I suggest that you assign the result of the “clone object” puzzle to a local variable, add that variable to a list for later use, and then set the cloned objects position.

You can use a custom JS function to easily delete the clones. See:

How do I remove objects from scene

@chidu, my AR scene has 21,000 tris. The bin.xz file is about 1MB. I have found through trial-and-error that I must keep the scene data simple. This includes meshes, textures, and shaders. I have a few textures files, none are larger than 1024×1024. I also try to keep my shaders simple. My goal is to limit the load on the GPU. The Snapdragon 855 on the Tab S5 does not seem to have any problem with AR scenes of this size.

If you are trying to get building-scale AR to work, you are attempting something that I have not. All of my AR work has been human-scale or smaller. I wonder how well the Google and Apple AR sub-systems are at anchorless AR environment mapping at such a large scale? Have you tried to get a very simple scene to function at building-scale? If it were my project, I would try something simple like sticking a few default cubes to the font of a large building and testing if Google AR Services can manage the markerless tracking at that scale and distance.
Good luck.

Hi Yuri,
This is an exciting new feature. The ability to call the puzzle functions from the web page or other JS code is especially interesting to me. I have to do this in all of my projects today. Before this enhancement, my implementation of this functionality was a bit of a hack.
I look forward to using this new clean approach. Thank you.

This is an interesting feature request, but I was wondering if I could make this work today in 2.14? We could write a simple dispatching function in the ExternalInterface. It would take two arguments, the name of the function to be called and the arguments to pass on to that function. It would look something like this:

	app.ExternalInterface.procedureCaller = function(procName, argsString) {
		app.ExternalInterface[procName](JSON.parse(argsString));
    }

For example, you could call it like this:
app.ExternalInterface.procedureCaller("myProcedure1","{'color':'red', 'shape':'sphere'}");

…but this does not work for ordinary procedure puzzles because their code is inside a closure and it is not accessible. However, this does work well for the “when called from JS as..” puzzle because those functions are published to the ExternalInterface.

I can use this technique if I make a wrapper for each of my procedure puzzles. The wrapper is a “when called from JS as..” puzzle and it calls the procedure puzzle (see screenshot). This is a little ugly, but it does work. If there is a way to access the ordinary procedure puzzles from the ExternalInterface we could avoid this two-step.

…and I used a JSON string argument to deal with the variable quantity of arguments that scalare mentioned in his post.

Oops. I was editing my previous post in an attempt to fix the formatting of the JavaScript code and the forum software seems to have deleted the post. Apparently square brackets can cause issues. At risk of double posting, here is my original post that Yuri responded to (with the JS code now included as an image).
———————-
Hi Yuri,
I do not wish to complicate this topic, but I do wonder if the remove() function is sufficient to completely remove an object and its data from memory? There are a few threads about this on Stack Exchange and a page in the Three documentation (https://threejs.org/docs/#manual/en/introduction/How-to-dispose-of-objects). I wrote a function to do this that removes the object from the scene and also disposes of the data. My hope was this approach would free up memory better than using remove() alone. What is the opinion of the Soft8soft team?
Thank you.

Hi Yuri,
I do not wish to complicate this topic, but I do wonder if the remove() function is sufficient to completely remove an object and its data from memory? There are a few threads about this on Stack Exchange and a page in the Three documentation (https://threejs.org/docs/#manual/en/introduction/How-to-dispose-of-objects). I wrote a function to do this that removes the object from the scene and also disposes of the data. My hope was this approach would free up memory better than using remove() alone. What is the opinion of the Soft8soft team?
Thank you.

	//A function to fully dispose of objects.
	//This is useful to dispose of cloned objects.
	app.ExternalInterface.disposeOfObjects = function (objects) {
		for (var i = 0; i < objects.length; i++) {
			if (typeof objects !== 'undefined') {
				var meshToBeDeleted = app.scene.getObjectByName(objects);
				app.scene.remove(meshToBeDeleted);
				meshToBeDeleted.geometry.dispose();
				meshToBeDeleted.material.dispose();
				meshToBeDeleted = undefined;
			}
		}
	};