> In the class I wrote, the
> movement is carried around with the animation. In the road_to_0.4, it is
> handled externally. I can see advantages to both. With it carried around
> with the animation data, you can specify variable pixel movement per frame.
> With it outside it is more abstracted, and more compatible with road_to_0.4
> code. Anyone have any opinions on this? I'd rather make any fixes now than
> later.
Maybe Alex should comment on this, but I believe that road_to_0.4
allowed to keep the movement seperate from the animation. That seems
to make sense for 2 reasons:
- not all animations will actually move.
- the same animation could move with different velocity (one NPC might
walk faster than the other)
The way I see it, animations (gfx data) and animators (describing a
position in an animation) should remain separated. The reason is
simple: to avoid having x copies of the same gfx when there are x
characters with the same shape on the screen (that was the case in 0.3
- and its not good). I think the code in road_to_0-4 makes a good
basis, but of course there is still room for improvements and your
enhancements are welcome.
Alex.
_______________________________________________
Adonthell-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/adonthell-devel
