I've done some tests in AS3, and the response is definitely better. Not pixel-accurate, as you all have noted, but definitely way more granular than in AS2...
.m On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Allandt Bik-Elliott (Receptacle) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > if you use updateAfterEvent() in your mouseMove event, you will get > it as quick as the flash player will allow, irrespective of the > framerate but you still won't get even close to every 10th pixel if > the user gives it some welly > > as3 does execute about 10 times faster (so they say - i'm sure > someone here has a real-world amount there) so, yes, in theory - you > would get a better response but bare in mind, it's still limited > > if you need to track the mouse over large distances it may be worth > your while to look at using javascript to get the mouse point from > outside the flash movie (for a spank the monkey style game - see > http://www.blitzgamer.com/play_games/miscellaneous/316/spank-the- > monkey.html for the example) and then pass it to flash for the result. > > > > > On 12 Mar 2008, at 20:07, Matt S. wrote: > > > Is this something where AS3 would be superior to AS2? I know its > > faster generally, can one expect better responsiveness here as well? > > > > .m > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Kerry Thompson > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> Matt S. wrote: > >> > >>> can anyone recommend a way to have pixel-accurate mouse tracking? > >>> If I > >>> move my mouse slowly it pretty much grabs them all, but any fast > >>> movements result in huge gaps in the _xmouse tracking, so instead of > >>> being 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12 etc, it'll be > >>> 1,4,6,9,12,15,16,23,30,35, etc. I need it it to be as accurate as > >>> possible. Can this be done? > >> > >> Nope. I can't even get that in my C++ programs, and C++ runs up > >> to 100 times > >> faster than Flash, maybe more. > >> > >> It's not really a Flash or C++ problem, anyway--it's a Windows > >> problem. > >> Windows sends a MOUSE_MOVE message whenever it can, but there is > >> no way it > >> can keep up if you zip across 2,000 pixels in 1/10 second. > >> > >> You'll see the same thing in any paint program, or, for that > >> matter, on > >> those electronic signature pads at the store. Ok, the signature pads > >> probably use left-over 6502s, but even a fast processor can't > >> keep up when > >> you zip across the screen. > >> > >> You might try some sort of interpolation algorithm if you need > >> every pixel, > >> like in a drawing program. > >> > >> Cordially, > >> > >> Kerry Thompson > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Flashcoders mailing list > >> Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com > >> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Flashcoders mailing list > > Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com > > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Flashcoders mailing list > Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > _______________________________________________ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
