Wouldn't that just lead to that macro being one frame behind? On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Christopher Wright < christopher_wri...@apple.com> wrote:
> > Seems like an artificial limitation to me, but oh well. > > > This was a new feature in 10.5 -- the reason for it is a bit subtle: > > If you have 2 consumer macros (layers 1 and 2), and layer 1 depends on the > output of layer 2, they'll execute out of order (layer 2 will need to > complete before layer 1 can begin), leading to incorrect output. > > (Yes, those familiar with graph theory can point out that macros should > just be logical groupings instead of execution-order-enforcers, but that's > not how it works under the hood for better or worse...) > > -- > Christopher Wright > christopher_wri...@apple.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. > Quartzcomposer-dev mailing list (Quartzcomposer-dev@lists.apple.com) > Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: > > http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/quartzcomposer-dev/gtoledo3%40gmail.com > > This email sent to gtole...@gmail.com > -- George Toledo gtole...@gmail.com www.georgetoledo.com The information contained in this E-mail and any attachments may be confidential. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify us immediately by telephone or return E-mail. You should not use or disclose the contents of this E-mail or any of the attachments for any purpose or to any persons.
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Quartzcomposer-dev mailing list (Quartzcomposer-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/quartzcomposer-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
