So Rick, are you coming down on the side of callLater(frame) or timers
as the best way to simulate threading?

 

And don't say, "move long running processes to the server".  That may
often be the best solution, but is not the questin at hand!

 

Tracy

 

________________________________

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Rick Winscot
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2008 12:56 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Re: Performance and UI failing to update?

 

It is true that Flash's default frame rate of 12 fps is overkill for
most business applications and could be adjusted to help keep code bits
in sync. However, this time between refresh operations is relative and
doesn't include the time it takes to render a frame - and Flash is smart
enough drop frames to keep things moving. So - really... using frame
rates and timers in your application probably isn't the best idea. 

The problem is that people (developers) get impatient and tend to want
things to happen on their time and forget that the framework is doing a
pretty good job... and that they just need to be better friends with
rendering cycles and the display list. 

Rick Winscot


On 12/23/08 11:13 PM, "Amy" <[email protected]> wrote:

        
         
        
        --- In [email protected]
<mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com
<mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com> > , "Manish Jethani" 
        <manish.jeth...@...> wrote:
        >
        > On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 2:23 AM, Amy <amyblankens...@...>
wrote:
        > > --- In [email protected]
<mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com
<mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com> > , "Tracy Spratt" <tspratt@> 
        wrote:
        > >>
        > >> A quick google indicates that, as Manish says, current
thinking 
        is
        > > to
        > >> use timer for this type of work.
        > >
        > > I'm not sure I agree with this, since a timer can't react
before 
        the
        > > next frame anyway (i.e. the most accurate a timer can be is
the 
        frame
        > > rate).
        > 
        > Agreed. The benefit of a timer-based thing is that you can
slow it 
        down further.
        
        To every other frame or every thidr frame or... ;-)
        
        Of course, you can change the frame rate to get a timer that's 
        accurate to the timing you want.
        
        -Amy
        > 
        > -- 
        > manishjethani.com
        >
        
         
            

 

Reply via email to