>> In Gopinath's case, he wants to check the coordinates on mouseUp,
>> and he was talking about a parent script. If I understand him right,
>> I don't think I would use any of these approaches--he would
>> potentially have numerous objects checking the mouseUp event, and it
>> could be a nightmare to debug.
>>
>> In his case, I think it's better to attach a mouseUp script to a
>> transparent sprite. That can all be done in an OOP framework, and
>> would be less prone to bugs.
>
>
> mmm...disagree. One object could easily define all the hot spots and
> handle mouse tracking without the need for transparent sprites in the
> score. With imaging lingo the rects of the hotspots could be drawn
> for debugging purposes if need be with 1 line of code. I guess it
> depends on how many hot spots he needs to define and how structured
> he wants to get.
I'm with Roy there. I've been toying with a version of Battleship that
builds a user-specified grid (user chooses row/column totals) through
imaging lingo. In this case, it makes perfect sense to use the same
coordinates that make the individual rects in the grid image to track
mousing. Imaging lingo has introduced a new slant to the old "one frame"
argument - now we can attempt a "one frame, one sprite" movie... whether
it's practical or not, it's fun to think about.
-Kurt
[To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to
http://www.penworks.com/LUJ/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!]
