Hey Colin, As far as keeping track of lists of sprites I wrote an article about this for DOUG. It uses lists and repeat loops for messaging specific groups of sprites. When I was working on it I did a bunch of testing similar to what I posted but with movies of 500 sprites. Of course I can't find those numbers now but found in general the same things shown by Pez and myself here that with lots of sprites and all over the place I got better performance with the repeat loop. Also the behaviour I used allowed for a bunch of sprites all having the same handler but being broken down into groups so you could specifically call a subset of sprites and not worry about others responding to the handler call.
Even if the repeat loop approach is a bit slower I liked the grouping flexibility that I got over the shotgun approach of "sendAllSprites" The article can be found at: http://www.director-online.com/accessArticle.cfm?id=843 later, Rob Colin Holgate wrote: > >If Director does store a list of currently available handlers, then I > >daresay it does it badly. > > I like the research! Can you do a test where there are lots and lots > of sprites, but that only a few have the handler? Compare that > against there only being those few sprites. > > One of the nice things about sendallsprites is that you don't have to > keep track of the sprite channels. If you have to move them around > they still work. With hard wired numbers you would have to update > your lists. [To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to http://www.penworks.com/lingo-l.cgi To post messages to the list, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Problems, email [EMAIL PROTECTED]). Lingo-L is for learning and helping with programming Lingo. Thanks!]
