Yes, it would be more processor and memory intensive to use empty movieclips for sync. The reason for this is that a movieclip is a special kind of object that has a ton of its own built-in methods and properties, none of which you need for timing purposes.
Managing the interval id's shouldn't be a problem - you should be able to scope them to one object whose purpose is to keep track of them all. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rifled Cloaca Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 5:03 PM To: Flashcoders mailing list Subject: [Flashcoders] SetInterval vs. onEnterFrame Flashcoders, I'm building a modular system that contains various programmatic animations within seperate modules, coordinated by a central wrapper class. I've opted to use empty movieclips with onEnterFrame functions to manage timing in animations and presentation playback, as opposed to setInterval. Reason being is that I don't want to have to worry about scoping my intervals, and most of all, losing track of intervals and eventually having them stack up, interfere with eachother, and cause memory leaks. Question is, isn't it more processor intensive to use a series of onEnterFrames like this? Can anyone think of any other cons to the method I've chosen? Thanks in advance! -g _______________________________________________ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com _______________________________________________ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
