Re: [Flashcoders] [SOLVED] arguments.caller -- name of this function?

[Hans Wichman]

Hi,

and nowhere near complete:). But it might suffice for most cases.

greetz
JC



On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 8:24 AM, Leonardo Scattola - New Vision srl <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Thanks everybody for your prompt response.
>
> A dude on the FlashMedia List (on which we crossposted) proposed this
> solution:
>
> setFunctionNames = function (pObjContainer) {
>  // Description:
>  // Sets the property "name" for every Function
>  // that was found in "pObjContainer"
>  // Arguments:
>  // pObjContainer -> Obj|Mc in which to recursively
>  //  search for functions
>  pObjContainer = pObjContainer || _root;
>  for (var p in pObjContainer) {
> if (typeof pObjContainer[p] == 'object') {
>   arguments.callee(pObjContainer[p]);
> } else if (typeof pObjContainer[p] == 'function') {
>   pObjContainer[p].name = p; // <-- sets the name
>   arguments.callee(pObjContainer[p].prototype);
> }
>  }
> }
>
> Quick, swift and efficient.
>
> ___
> 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] [SOLVED] arguments.caller -- name of this function?

[Leonardo Scattola - New Vision srl]

Thanks everybody for your prompt response.

A dude on the FlashMedia List (on which we crossposted) proposed this 
solution:


setFunctionNames = function (pObjContainer) {
  // Description:
  // Sets the property "name" for every Function
  // that was found in "pObjContainer"
  // Arguments:
  // pObjContainer -> Obj|Mc in which to recursively
  //  search for functions
  pObjContainer = pObjContainer || _root;
  for (var p in pObjContainer) {
 if (typeof pObjContainer[p] == 'object') {
   arguments.callee(pObjContainer[p]);
 } else if (typeof pObjContainer[p] == 'function') {
   pObjContainer[p].name = p; // <-- sets the name
   arguments.callee(pObjContainer[p].prototype);
 }
  }
}

Quick, swift and efficient.
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

[Kerry Thompson]

Steven Sacks wrote:

> Flash used to be a toy, and, up until Flash 8, it still could beThe
reason
> you see so much BAD Flash is because it was SO EASY to use for even non
> programmers.

Steven has a point (even though I cut most of his post). Remember the days
when Flash's nickname was "Skip-intro"?

The Internet has changed, and will continue to change. It has gotten more
sophisticated. Browsers have gotten more sophisticated. Users have gotten
more sophisticated. To keep Flash/Flex as a premier Web development tool, it
has to get more sophisticated, and its users must get more sophisticated.

Having said that, I'd like to see Flash have drag-and-drop behaviors like
Director has. In its first decade or so, Director followed a similar path as
Flash. It started out as a simple animation tool with an easy-to-use
language, and developed into a sophisticated programmer's tool. The
introduction of drag-and-drop behaviors brought it back into the realm of
the designer, while remaining a sophisticated programmer's tool.

Of course, Macromedia made a number of blunders with Director/Shockwave
that, I hope, will not be repeated by Adobe on Flash. Making it more
sophisticated was not one of those blunders, though.

Cordially,

Kerry Thompson

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

[Juan Pablo Califano]

Hi,

>>>
If you don't care about learning the code, why would you care about
whether it's AS3 or not?

To me that point is missing from Colin's argument, Adobe made the effort
to include 2 VM's so old content would be supported. Just us AS2. Am I
missing something?
>>>

I think so... From the article, it's clear the he's not saying, "let's go
back to on/onclipevent" handlers, but rather make it as easier for people
who are not programmers and / or are not interested in learning about OO,
inheritance, packages and stuff (which is a respectable position, IMO). What
he says is, give these people an easier interface in the authoring tool and
behind the scenes convert that input into AS 3 code. Which I think is
perfectly reasonable and not even technically complex to implement. So, if
you're a coder and you want to have more control and make things more OO,
neat, clean and such, great. But you shouldn't be forced to go that way for
adding even the simplest functionality.

I agree with the article and with what Steve has pointed out already.
Even from an historical point of view, I think that what made the flash
platform ubiquitous was that many people started to create cool stuff for
it. And that was possible because there was a relatively low entry barrier.
Think about Java on the client side. How many applets do you find around
nowadays? Was it because the Java technology was inferior to Flash? I think
not, and probably it's still (and certainly was) the opposite way. But to
build an applet, you needed to have a fair knowledge of programming. And
even then, truth is, especially for the UI part, you can build something
that looks way better, in less time, without having necessarily formal
knowledge on programming.

Of course, when you start to build more complex stuff, things will
necessarily get more complex and having better tools and following good
pratices will save you time and allow you to even make it possible in the
first place. But if you want to do something simple in the simplest possible
way, why not?

Cheers
Juan Pablo Califano

2008/7/16, Barry Hannah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> I agree with you to a point Steven, but speaking for myself if I may.
> I used to be a "child" as you put it - to the extent that all Flash
> developers/designers were back in the day. Keeping up with the code side
> of things as they have developed - beyond the expectations of everyone -
> has been interesting (I don't have a programming background). We've all
> had to grow, as developers and users have expected more from the tools
> and the applications made with them. Call it progress, professional
> development, whatever. If you don't keep up in this industry you're
> toast (or destined to make banners).
>
> I wonder why someone who likes their timeline paradigm would even bother
> with AS3, why not just stick to AS2? You can still code for player 9 and
> take advantage of fullscreen or HD. Might not last long but for now why
> not? If you don't care about learning the code, why would you care about
> whether it's AS3 or not?
>
> To me that point is missing from Colin's argument, Adobe made the effort
> to include 2 VM's so old content would be supported. Just us AS2. Am I
> missing something?
>
> Barry.
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steven
> Sacks
> Sent: Thursday, 17 July 2008 12:18 p.m.
> To: Flash Coders List
> Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0
>
> Ashim D'Silva wrote:
>
> Flash is not a toy. You can't pick it up, with no prior knowledge, and
> expect to have a app 2 hours later.
>
> ---
>
> This is where we part ways.  Flash used to be a toy, and, up until Flash
> 8, it still could be.  Now, with AS3, Flash has ceased to be a child's
> toy and is now only a toy for adults.  Child, in this sense, means
> non-programmer who is more comfortable with design and timeline
> animation, and adult meaning seasoned programmer.
>
> The notion that Flash is not (or was ever) meant to be easy enough to
> just pick up and make something really quick is diametrically opposed to
> reality.  The reason you see so much BAD Flash is because it was SO EASY
> to use for even non programmers.
>
> It's the same with all the bad HTML.  It's like saying that AJAX means
> that the web browser is no longer a toy.  The difference here is that
> browsers still accept "noob" HTML coding standards (according to people
> who are AJAX/CSS experts), but Actionscript 3 gives you zero latitude.
>
> Flash is, at its _root, a vector animation tool with a scripting
> language tacked on.  To say that a vector animation tool is not a toy is
> pretty far off the mark.
>
> Actionscript 3 takes Flash away from the realm of the artist and into
> the realm of the programmer.  It makes simple things harder (regardless
> if it's better, it's still harder for non-coders) and is thus much less
> appealing to its original core audience, and a VAST MAJORITY of the
> 

RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

[Barry Hannah]

I agree with you to a point Steven, but speaking for myself if I may.
I used to be a "child" as you put it - to the extent that all Flash
developers/designers were back in the day. Keeping up with the code side
of things as they have developed - beyond the expectations of everyone -
has been interesting (I don't have a programming background). We've all
had to grow, as developers and users have expected more from the tools
and the applications made with them. Call it progress, professional
development, whatever. If you don't keep up in this industry you're
toast (or destined to make banners).

I wonder why someone who likes their timeline paradigm would even bother
with AS3, why not just stick to AS2? You can still code for player 9 and
take advantage of fullscreen or HD. Might not last long but for now why
not? If you don't care about learning the code, why would you care about
whether it's AS3 or not?

To me that point is missing from Colin's argument, Adobe made the effort
to include 2 VM's so old content would be supported. Just us AS2. Am I
missing something?

Barry.



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steven
Sacks
Sent: Thursday, 17 July 2008 12:18 p.m.
To: Flash Coders List
Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

Ashim D'Silva wrote:

Flash is not a toy. You can't pick it up, with no prior knowledge, and
expect to have a app 2 hours later.

---

This is where we part ways.  Flash used to be a toy, and, up until Flash
8, it still could be.  Now, with AS3, Flash has ceased to be a child's
toy and is now only a toy for adults.  Child, in this sense, means
non-programmer who is more comfortable with design and timeline
animation, and adult meaning seasoned programmer.

The notion that Flash is not (or was ever) meant to be easy enough to
just pick up and make something really quick is diametrically opposed to
reality.  The reason you see so much BAD Flash is because it was SO EASY
to use for even non programmers.  

It's the same with all the bad HTML.  It's like saying that AJAX means
that the web browser is no longer a toy.  The difference here is that
browsers still accept "noob" HTML coding standards (according to people
who are AJAX/CSS experts), but Actionscript 3 gives you zero latitude.

Flash is, at its _root, a vector animation tool with a scripting
language tacked on.  To say that a vector animation tool is not a toy is
pretty far off the mark.  

Actionscript 3 takes Flash away from the realm of the artist and into
the realm of the programmer.  It makes simple things harder (regardless
if it's better, it's still harder for non-coders) and is thus much less
appealing to its original core audience, and a VAST MAJORITY of the
people who use it.

Sorry, but good Flash coders are hard to find.  You just think otherwise
because you run in these circles.  For every person participating in
online Flash development communities, there are thousands who aren't.

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

Scanned by Bizo Email Filter


___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

[Steven Sacks]

Ashim D'Silva wrote:

Flash is not a toy. You can't pick it up, with no prior knowledge, and
expect to have a app 2 hours later.

---

This is where we part ways.  Flash used to be a toy, and, up until Flash 8, it 
still could be.  Now, with AS3, Flash has ceased to be a child's toy and is now 
only a toy for adults.  Child, in this sense, means non-programmer who is more 
comfortable with design and timeline animation, and adult meaning seasoned 
programmer.

The notion that Flash is not (or was ever) meant to be easy enough to just pick up and make something really quick is diametrically opposed to reality.  The reason you see so much BAD Flash is because it was SO EASY to use for even non programmers.  


It's the same with all the bad HTML.  It's like saying that AJAX means that the web 
browser is no longer a toy.  The difference here is that browsers still accept 
"noob" HTML coding standards (according to people who are AJAX/CSS experts), 
but Actionscript 3 gives you zero latitude.

Flash is, at its _root, a vector animation tool with a scripting language tacked on.  To say that a vector animation tool is not a toy is pretty far off the mark.  


Actionscript 3 takes Flash away from the realm of the artist and into the realm 
of the programmer.  It makes simple things harder (regardless if it's better, 
it's still harder for non-coders) and is thus much less appealing to its 
original core audience, and a VAST MAJORITY of the people who use it.

Sorry, but good Flash coders are hard to find.  You just think otherwise 
because you run in these circles.  For every person participating in online 
Flash development communities, there are thousands who aren't.

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

Re: [Flashcoders] Flash & CMS

[Paul Andrews]

Thanks Tim and Sunil - something to check out.

Paul
- Original Message - 
From: "tim shaya" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "Flash Coders List" 
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 12:42 AM
Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Flash & CMS



Hi Paul,
I've recently played around with Drupal as well because it's open source,
built on PHP/MySQL and I've seen AMFPHP, SWFaddress, SWFobject modules for
it.

HOWEVER -- I started messing with Drupal 6.3, since the latest version is
Drupal 7, but quickly realized that if I wanted a fuller list of free 3rd
party modules I might have to use Drupal 5.x (5.8 last I heard). AMFPHP is
now part of the Services module.

Hope this helps.


On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 4:35 AM, Sunil Jolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


I've used Drupal with the AMFPHP module very successfully.

S



___
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

Re: [Flashcoders] Flash & CMS

[tim shaya]

Hi Paul,
I've recently played around with Drupal as well because it's open source,
built on PHP/MySQL and I've seen AMFPHP, SWFaddress, SWFobject modules for
it.

HOWEVER -- I started messing with Drupal 6.3, since the latest version is
Drupal 7, but quickly realized that if I wanted a fuller list of free 3rd
party modules I might have to use Drupal 5.x (5.8 last I heard). AMFPHP is
now part of the Services module.

Hope this helps.


On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 4:35 AM, Sunil Jolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I've used Drupal with the AMFPHP module very successfully.
>
> S
>
>
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

Re: [Flashcoders] Verifying Numerical Input

[Ashim D'Silva]

I'd say if it doesn't influence your system too much, restrict what's
put in the text field (txtField.restrict) to just numbers. That way,
it saves you trouble, and it shows the user what you're expecting
instead of doing 'magic' in the background.

2008/7/17 Juan Pablo Califano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> A quick way to do it I can think of off the top of my head is making a copy
> of the user's input, strip the thousands separator, cast to Number and pass
> the result to some formatNumber function (like the one in the ActionScript
> CookBook lib). Then, just compare that with the original input;  if they're
> equal, the input should be ok.
>
> Cheers
> Juan Pablo Califano
>
>
> 2008/7/16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> Hello Everybody,
>>
>> Before I try to maybe "re-invent the Wheel", and write my own code.  I  was
>> wondering whether anyone has a sample Actionscript 3.0 code for
>> verifying  the
>> input to a text field is a Number.
>>
>> Generally, the isNaN() is ok.  But when one input a number with  the
>> "Thousand Separator" (Comma) or ((Period) in certain countries)),
>> isNaN()  does not
>> work.
>>
>> For example, suppose the required answer (input) is 1.00.  If the  user
>> inputs 10,000.00.  Flash does not consider that as a number. If  the user
>> inputs 100,00.00 that is certainly not a number.
>>
>> So, unless I am missing some built-in Actionscript fuction/class, the code
>> needs to check whether the input contains Thousand separator(s)
>> and  whether
>> they are in the right position.
>>
>> Once the check on the Thousand Separator(s) proves to be OK, i.e.,
>> the  input
>> is a legal number, we can than compare this number to the one  required.
>>
>>
>> Thank you,
>> D. Abramovich
>>
>>
>> Interactive Training Solutions  (ITS)
>> _www.its-metacentre.com_ (http://www.its-metacentre.com)
>>
>>
>>
>> **Get the scoop on last night's hottest shows and the live
>> music
>> scene in your area - Check out TourTracker.com!
>> (http://www.tourtracker.com?NCID=aolmus0005000112)
>> ___
>> 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
>



-- 
Yet another Random Lines
More usable than ever!
www.therandomlines.com
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

[Ashim D'Silva]

I love flash and have been using it since 5.  And although at the
time, it was almost possible to drag and drop what you needed to get
something going, we know there were a host of disadvantages that came
with everything being so dynamic and code being everywhere. So as
Flash has gotten stricter, I've had to learn more and more about
coding practices and OOP of course, and let me say, it's brilliant.
Let me say straight up, I'm a designer,  not a programmer so much
however, if you're going to work with Flash you really NEED to be a
bit of both.

Flash is not a toy. You can't pick it up, with no prior knowledge, and
expect to have a app 2 hours later. And I'll gladly put in the work to
learn for the amount of power flash is beginning to put at our
disposal. 3D, EFFICIENT filters and blend modes, pixel level controls
- if I was to chose between a system that works well, and a system
that's easy to use, I would much rather have the former - shopping
online should be easy, building an online shop: not so.

And as for flash banners: glorified or otherwise; I detest them and if
it were possible to burn them, I would.

Ashim

-- 
Yet another Random Lines
More usable than ever!
www.therandomlines.com



2008/7/17 Steven Sacks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Everyone forgets their roots.  Nobody remembers what it was like when they
> were first learning Flash and learning the basics of programming.
>
> Colin Moock forgot his roots when six months ago he wrote an article about
> how easy AS3 was to learn and how n00bs should be learning it right out the
> gate.
>
> Colin Moock has now remembered his roots and written what amounts to an
> effective retraction of his original article.
>
> Anyone who looks at the archives of Flashcoders knows where I stand on this
> issue.  People who say all these features in AS3 are much better are either
>
> 1. Experienced, talented coders, or people who came from other programming
> languages.
>
> 2. See 1.
>
> Yes, it's really bad to put scripts on MovieClips or nested in some timeline
> somewhere.  But, it's also really good for some designer who just needs to
> get some glorified banner out the door.
>
> Yes, it's questionable OOP to use _parent._parent, and it's certainly hard
> to maintain, but it's also really good for some animator who just needs to
> set the text of some TextField two levels up.
>
> Advanced coders often take their intelligence and knowledge for granted.
> ___
> 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

Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

[Steve Mathews]

The more I read here, the more I am on the fence. On the one hand, I
use FlexBuilder every day and love AS3 as a language. But at the same
time I think Steven has a good point here. In the end I actually think
Colin is 'mostly' correct with his post.

What we need is for the tools to support simplifying usage of the
language. Let the developers creating RIAs use the power of the
language, let the designers creating simple interactions use the
simplicity of a tool. The problem here is that Flash CS3 falls short
of simplifying, while FlexBuilder does a great job of giving
developers access to the power of the language.

Steve Mathews
Senior Team Lead

Flypaper Studio, Inc.
2999 North 44th Street, Suite 200
Phoenix, AZ 85018
www.flypaper.com


On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 2:53 PM, Steven Sacks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Everyone forgets their roots.  Nobody remembers what it was like when they
> were first learning Flash and learning the basics of programming.
>
> Colin Moock forgot his roots when six months ago he wrote an article about
> how easy AS3 was to learn and how n00bs should be learning it right out the
> gate.
>
> Colin Moock has now remembered his roots and written what amounts to an
> effective retraction of his original article.
>
> Anyone who looks at the archives of Flashcoders knows where I stand on this
> issue.  People who say all these features in AS3 are much better are either
>
> 1. Experienced, talented coders, or people who came from other programming
> languages.
>
> 2. See 1.
>
> Yes, it's really bad to put scripts on MovieClips or nested in some timeline
> somewhere.  But, it's also really good for some designer who just needs to
> get some glorified banner out the door.
>
> Yes, it's questionable OOP to use _parent._parent, and it's certainly hard
> to maintain, but it's also really good for some animator who just needs to
> set the text of some TextField two levels up.
>
> Advanced coders often take their intelligence and knowledge for granted.
> ___
> 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

Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

[Steven Sacks]

Everyone forgets their roots.  Nobody remembers what it was like when 
they were first learning Flash and learning the basics of programming.


Colin Moock forgot his roots when six months ago he wrote an article 
about how easy AS3 was to learn and how n00bs should be learning it 
right out the gate.


Colin Moock has now remembered his roots and written what amounts to an 
effective retraction of his original article.


Anyone who looks at the archives of Flashcoders knows where I stand on 
this issue.  People who say all these features in AS3 are much better 
are either


1. Experienced, talented coders, or people who came from other 
programming languages.


2. See 1.

Yes, it's really bad to put scripts on MovieClips or nested in some 
timeline somewhere.  But, it's also really good for some designer who 
just needs to get some glorified banner out the door.


Yes, it's questionable OOP to use _parent._parent, and it's certainly 
hard to maintain, but it's also really good for some animator who just 
needs to set the text of some TextField two levels up.


Advanced coders often take their intelligence and knowledge for granted.
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

[Merrill, Jason]

I'm going to do a switcheroo.  Excellent post Patrick, I'm in agreement
more and more after reading this and previous debunking Moock's points.
Moock seems to be really stretching his points in order to make a viral
blog post.  You're making more sense than he is. 

Jason Merrill 
Bank of America 
Enterprise Technology & Global Risk L&LD 
Instructional Technology & Media

Join the Bank of America Flash Platform Developer Community 

Are you a Bank of America associate interested in innovative learning
ideas and technologies?
Check out our internal  GT&O Innovative Learning Blog & subscribe. 

 

>>-Original Message-
>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf 
>>Of Patrick Matte | BLITZ
>>Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 4:17 PM
>>To: Flash Coders List
>>Subject: RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0
>>
>>I've always admired Colin Moock, but after reading those 9 
>>points, I'm not sure he still has all that credibility anymore...
>>
>> >1. The removal of on()/onClipEvent() from Flash CS3 
>>makes creating
>>> simple interactivity hard.
>>
>>Who would want to add an onClipEvent on a movieclip anymore? 
>>I haven't done that since like... flash 5 or 6... You're much 
>>better off writing function onEnterFrame(){} instead of 
>>onClipEvent(enterFrame){}... And I'm so glad AS3 got rid of 
>>that onLoad method...
>>
>>>2. Getting rid of loaded .swf files is hard.
>>That is like the only point in this list that makes sense.
>>
>>>3. Casting DisplayObject.parent makes controlling parent movie 
>>> clips hard.
>>Not sure what that means but I never ever use parent... its 
>>just bad OOP... But I guess they could have casted parent as 
>>Sprite. And also maybe set Sprite as a dynamic class like MovieClip?
>>
>>>4. The removal of getURL() makes linking hard.
>>Yeah well it's just a little more complicated but when you 
>>know how to do it, it's just fine.
>>
>>>5. The removal of loadMovie() makes loading .swf files 
>>and images hard.
>>Haven't used loadmovie since flash 6. In flash 7, use 
>>MovieClipLoader instead, it's much better. Now why does AS3 
>>use Loader instead of MovieClipLoader... that I don't know...
>>
>>>6. ActionScript 3.0's additional errors make coding cumbersome.
>>Hmm well those errors are supposed to help you... But I admit 
>>that some of the errors could be a little more explicit on 
>>what is wrong... If I'm trying to access a property that is 
>>undefined, can Flash please tell me which one ?
>>
>>>7. Referring to library symbols dynamically is unintuitive.
>>No it's not. I really like doing addChild(new RedCircle()) 
>>instead of attchMovieClip("RedCircle", "circle", 
>>getNextHighestDepth())
>>
>>>8. Adding custom functionality to manually created text 
>>fields, to 
>>> all movie clips, or to all buttons is cumbersome.
>>I don't think this is really relevant. Nobody wants all 
>>classes to be dynamic do they? Althought, I admit it could be 
>>nice to extend TextField...
>>
>>>9. The removal of duplicateMovieClip() makes cloning a MovieClip 
>>> instance (really) hard.
>>Duplicate movieclips ? Geez, I remember using that back in 
>>the day, I would put a button off stage and then duplicate it 
>>to create multiple instances of it. But you're much better 
>>off using attachMovie if you're working with AS2.
>>
>>
>>BLITZ | Patrick Matte - 310-551-0200 x214
>>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf 
>>Of Jordan L. Chilcott
>>Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 12:03 PM
>>To: Flash Coders List
>>Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0
>>
>>Let's be fair: I'm not looking to argue. I have a wife for that. :)
>>
>>I intend to state my issues, but it may have to wait a couple 
>>of days because I'm sure most, if not all, of you are in a 
>>working situation and faced with some slimy brown stuff 
>>rolling downhill towards you. I was going to type a whole 
>>thing before this happened, but let me just start for now by 
>>saying that having programmed in Flash among other things, 
>>that a lot of things I have issues against were, in my mind, 
>>the cause of a lot of programming deficiencies and obstacles 
>>within Flash.
>>
>>I intend to elaborate further... and keep in mind that this 
>>is, again, just my opinion.
>>
>>jord
>>
>>Kerry Thompson wrote:
>>> Jord wrote:
>>>
>>>
 Let me rephrase this: I hardly agree with MOST of the issues.

>>>
>>> Fair enough. It would be a valuable contribution to the 
>>discussion if 
>>> you told us which issues you have,  issues with, and why.
>>>
>>> I personally am not in a position to argue with Colin 
>>Moock, but I do 
>>> enjoy a good debate, as long as it illuminates issues.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>___
>>Flashcoders mailing list
>>Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
>>http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
>>
>>_

RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

[Patrick Matte | BLITZ]

I've always admired Colin Moock, but after reading those 9 points, I'm not sure 
he still has all that credibility anymore...

 >1. The removal of on()/onClipEvent() from Flash CS3 makes creating
> simple interactivity hard.

Who would want to add an onClipEvent on a movieclip anymore? I haven't done 
that since like... flash 5 or 6... You're much better off writing function 
onEnterFrame(){} instead of onClipEvent(enterFrame){}... And I'm so glad AS3 
got rid of that onLoad method...

>2. Getting rid of loaded .swf files is hard.
That is like the only point in this list that makes sense.

>3. Casting DisplayObject.parent makes controlling parent movie
> clips hard.
Not sure what that means but I never ever use parent... its just bad OOP... But 
I guess they could have casted parent as Sprite. And also maybe set Sprite as a 
dynamic class like MovieClip?

>4. The removal of getURL() makes linking hard.
Yeah well it's just a little more complicated but when you know how to do it, 
it's just fine.

>5. The removal of loadMovie() makes loading .swf files and images hard.
Haven't used loadmovie since flash 6. In flash 7, use MovieClipLoader instead, 
it's much better. Now why does AS3 use Loader instead of MovieClipLoader... 
that I don't know...

>6. ActionScript 3.0's additional errors make coding cumbersome.
Hmm well those errors are supposed to help you... But I admit that some of the 
errors could be a little more explicit on what is wrong... If I'm trying to 
access a property that is undefined, can Flash please tell me which one ?

>7. Referring to library symbols dynamically is unintuitive.
No it's not. I really like doing addChild(new RedCircle()) instead of 
attchMovieClip("RedCircle", "circle", getNextHighestDepth())

>8. Adding custom functionality to manually created text fields, to
> all movie clips, or to all buttons is cumbersome.
I don't think this is really relevant. Nobody wants all classes to be dynamic 
do they? Althought, I admit it could be nice to extend TextField...

>9. The removal of duplicateMovieClip() makes cloning a MovieClip
> instance (really) hard.
Duplicate movieclips ? Geez, I remember using that back in the day, I would put 
a button off stage and then duplicate it to create multiple instances of it. 
But you're much better off using attachMovie if you're working with AS2.


BLITZ | Patrick Matte - 310-551-0200 x214

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jordan L. 
Chilcott
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 12:03 PM
To: Flash Coders List
Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

Let's be fair: I'm not looking to argue. I have a wife for that. :)

I intend to state my issues, but it may have to wait a couple of days
because I'm sure most, if not all, of you are in a working situation and
faced with some slimy brown stuff rolling downhill towards you. I was
going to type a whole thing before this happened, but let me just start
for now by saying that having programmed in Flash among other things,
that a lot of things I have issues against were, in my mind, the cause
of a lot of programming deficiencies and obstacles within Flash.

I intend to elaborate further... and keep in mind that this is, again,
just my opinion.

jord

Kerry Thompson wrote:
> Jord wrote:
>
>
>> Let me rephrase this: I hardly agree with MOST of the issues.
>>
>
> Fair enough. It would be a valuable contribution to the discussion if you
> told us which issues you have,  issues with, and why.
>
> I personally am not in a position to argue with Colin Moock, but I do enjoy
> a good debate, as long as it illuminates issues.
>
>
>
___
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

Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

[Jordan L. Chilcott]

Let's be fair: I'm not looking to argue. I have a wife for that. :)

I intend to state my issues, but it may have to wait a couple of days 
because I'm sure most, if not all, of you are in a working situation and 
faced with some slimy brown stuff rolling downhill towards you. I was 
going to type a whole thing before this happened, but let me just start 
for now by saying that having programmed in Flash among other things, 
that a lot of things I have issues against were, in my mind, the cause 
of a lot of programming deficiencies and obstacles within Flash.


I intend to elaborate further... and keep in mind that this is, again, 
just my opinion.


jord

Kerry Thompson wrote:

Jord wrote:

  

Let me rephrase this: I hardly agree with MOST of the issues.



Fair enough. It would be a valuable contribution to the discussion if you
told us which issues you have,  issues with, and why. 


I personally am not in a position to argue with Colin Moock, but I do enjoy
a good debate, as long as it illuminates issues.


  

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

[Flashcoders] AS3 BitmapData - yeah, but how?

[Cor]

Hi List,

I am trying to understand BitmapData.
What I am basically trying to create is a swf-loader.
Wich reads every frame and creates a bitmap of it and place them as
thumbnails in the swf-loader.
When I click on a thumbnail it should show big.
The same as every photo viewer, but instead of photo's it should show the
frame content.

Can anyone give me some AS3 example or a tutorial?
TIA.

Kind regards,
Cor

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

[Kerry Thompson]

Jord wrote:

> Let me rephrase this: I hardly agree with MOST of the issues.

Fair enough. It would be a valuable contribution to the discussion if you
told us which issues you have,  issues with, and why. 

I personally am not in a position to argue with Colin Moock, but I do enjoy
a good debate, as long as it illuminates issues.

Cordially,

Kerry Thompson

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

Re: [Flashcoders] Verifying Numerical Input

[Juan Pablo Califano]

A quick way to do it I can think of off the top of my head is making a copy
of the user's input, strip the thousands separator, cast to Number and pass
the result to some formatNumber function (like the one in the ActionScript
CookBook lib). Then, just compare that with the original input;  if they're
equal, the input should be ok.

Cheers
Juan Pablo Califano


2008/7/16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Hello Everybody,
>
> Before I try to maybe "re-invent the Wheel", and write my own code.  I  was
> wondering whether anyone has a sample Actionscript 3.0 code for
> verifying  the
> input to a text field is a Number.
>
> Generally, the isNaN() is ok.  But when one input a number with  the
> "Thousand Separator" (Comma) or ((Period) in certain countries)),
> isNaN()  does not
> work.
>
> For example, suppose the required answer (input) is 1.00.  If the  user
> inputs 10,000.00.  Flash does not consider that as a number. If  the user
> inputs 100,00.00 that is certainly not a number.
>
> So, unless I am missing some built-in Actionscript fuction/class, the code
> needs to check whether the input contains Thousand separator(s)
> and  whether
> they are in the right position.
>
> Once the check on the Thousand Separator(s) proves to be OK, i.e.,
> the  input
> is a legal number, we can than compare this number to the one  required.
>
>
> Thank you,
> D. Abramovich
>
>
> Interactive Training Solutions  (ITS)
> _www.its-metacentre.com_ (http://www.its-metacentre.com)
>
>
>
> **Get the scoop on last night's hottest shows and the live
> music
> scene in your area - Check out TourTracker.com!
> (http://www.tourtracker.com?NCID=aolmus0005000112)
> ___
> 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

RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

[Merrill, Jason]

>>Let me rephrase this: I hardly agree with MOST of the issues.
>>Of course I did... I don't deny his points. I just don't agree with
them all. 
>>We're talking about opinions here. I'm no more incorrect as the next
guy, including Colin.

Agreed.  Well, actually, I guess thinking a little deeper on the points
(maybe more than I should), I disagree with his charges #1, 7, and 9 (if
for #9 you can use the new operator, instead of cloning, - cloning is
not something I ever did anyway), but agree with the rest. 

Jason Merrill 
Bank of America 
Enterprise Technology & Global Risk L&LD 
Instructional Technology & Media

Join the Bank of America Flash Platform Developer Community 

Are you a Bank of America associate interested in innovative learning
ideas and technologies?
Check out our internal  GT&O Innovative Learning Blog & subscribe. 

 

>>-Original Message-
>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf 
>>Of Jordan L. Chilcott
>>Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 2:28 PM
>>To: Flash Coders List
>>Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0
>>

>>
>>jord
>>
>>Matt S. wrote:
>>> Even the garbage collection and unload movie issues?
>>>
>>> .m
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>>___
>>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

Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

[Jordan L. Chilcott]

Of course I did... I don't deny his points. I just don't agree with them 
all. We're talking about opinions here. I'm no more incorrect as the 
next guy, including Colin.


jord

Merrill, Jason wrote:
I'm on the other side of this... I hardly agree with any of 
these points.
  


Are you serious? Did you read the article?


  

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

[Jordan L. Chilcott]

Let me rephrase this: I hardly agree with MOST of the issues.

jord

Matt S. wrote:

Even the garbage collection and unload movie issues?

.m


  

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

[Flashcoders] Verifying Numerical Input

[ITSCO]

Hello Everybody,
 
Before I try to maybe "re-invent the Wheel", and write my own code.  I  was 
wondering whether anyone has a sample Actionscript 3.0 code for verifying  the 
input to a text field is a Number. 
 
Generally, the isNaN() is ok.  But when one input a number with  the 
"Thousand Separator" (Comma) or ((Period) in certain countries)), isNaN()  does 
not 
work.
 
For example, suppose the required answer (input) is 1.00.  If the  user 
inputs 10,000.00.  Flash does not consider that as a number. If  the user 
inputs 100,00.00 that is certainly not a number.
 
So, unless I am missing some built-in Actionscript fuction/class, the code  
needs to check whether the input contains Thousand separator(s) and  whether 
they are in the right position. 
 
Once the check on the Thousand Separator(s) proves to be OK, i.e., the  input 
is a legal number, we can than compare this number to the one  required.
 
 
Thank you,
D. Abramovich


Interactive Training Solutions  (ITS)
_www.its-metacentre.com_ (http://www.its-metacentre.com) 



**Get the scoop on last night's hottest shows and the live music 
scene in your area - Check out TourTracker.com!  
(http://www.tourtracker.com?NCID=aolmus0005000112)
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

[Merrill, Jason]

>>I'm on the other side of this... I hardly agree with any of 
>>these points.

Are you serious? Did you read the article?

Jason Merrill 
Bank of America 
Enterprise Technology & Global Risk L&LD 
Instructional Technology & Media

Join the Bank of America Flash Platform Developer Community 

Are you a Bank of America associate interested in innovative learning
ideas and technologies?
Check out our internal  GT&O Innovative Learning Blog & subscribe. 

 
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

[Matt S.]

Even the garbage collection and unload movie issues?

.m

On 7/16/08, Jordan L. Chilcott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm on the other side of this... I hardly agree with any of these points.
>
> jord
>
> Brian Mays wrote:
>> Awesome. Thanks. This reinforces some points I've been making to so
>> colleagues.
>>
>> Brian Mays
>>
>>
>> On 7/15/08 3:06 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> hi all,
>>> i just published an article called "Charges Against ActionScript 3.0"
>>> covering the things people don't like about ActionScript 3.0.
>>>
>>> it's posted on O'Reilly's InsideRIA, here:
>>> http://www.insideria.com/2008/07/the-charges-against-actionscri.html
>>>
>>> The article discusses the following issues:
>>>
>>>  1. The removal of on()/onClipEvent() from Flash CS3 makes creating
>>> simple interactivity hard.
>>>  2. Getting rid of loaded .swf files is hard.
>>>  3. Casting DisplayObject.parent makes controlling parent movie clips
>>> hard.
>>>  4. The removal of getURL() makes linking hard.
>>>  5. The removal of loadMovie() makes loading .swf files and images
>>> hard.
>>>  6. ActionScript 3.0's additional errors make coding cumbersome.
>>>  7. Referring to library symbols dynamically is unintuitive.
>>>  8. Adding custom functionality to manually created text fields, to
>>> all movie clips, or to all buttons is cumbersome.
>>>  9. The removal of duplicateMovieClip() makes cloning a MovieClip
>>> instance (really) hard.
>>>
>>> if you have comments, please leave them on the article so i can respond
>>> if necessary.
>>>
>>> colin
>>>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Flashcoders] arguments.caller -- name of this function?

[Hans Wichman]

ps this is a very old article, the new reflection package is done, if you
are interested let me know

On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 7:22 PM, Hans Wichman <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  http://objectpainters.com/blog/2007/07/16/argumentscallee_name/
>
> HTH
> JC
>
>   On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 6:06 PM, Leonardo Scattola - New Vision srl <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Hi list!
>> I apologize in advance if this question has already been asked... it is my
>> little Wednesday puzzle :D
>>
>> Given this sample code (AS2):
>>
>> myFunction=function() {
>>   // call the second one:
>>   trace("Now calling secondFunction");
>>   secondFunction();
>>   trace("End.");
>> }
>>
>> secondFunction=function() {
>>   // who summoned me?
>>   trace("arguments.caller= "+arguments.caller);
>> }
>>
>> The question is simple: secondFunction traces (of course)
>> "arguments.caller= [type Function]".
>> Is there a method to return the name of the caller function (in this case
>> "myFunction")?
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> --
>> * Logo New Vision Leonardo Scattola*
>> /Research & Development/
>> New Vision Group
>>
>> tel.049.8841146fax049.8840366
>> videoconf. newvision.comunicarepro.it 
>> web site www.newvision.it 
>>
>>
>>
>> Le informazioni contenute in questa e-mail e nei suoi eventuali allegati
>> sono da intendersi confidenziali e riservate esclusivamente ai destinatari.
>> Ne sono proibiti l'utilizzo e la divulgazione a qualunque fine senza previa
>> autorizzazione del mittente.
>> Se avete ricevuto questa e-mail per errore, vi preghiamo cortesemente di
>> notificarlo (via e-mail, fax, o telefono) al mittente e di distruggerla.
>> Tutti i messaggi elettronici sono suscettibili di alterazioni. I dati
>> personali vengono trattati esclusivamente per le finalità della presente
>> comunicazione in conformità con la legislazione vigente (D.L. 196/2003
>> "Codice Privacy").
>> Per qualunque informazione si prega di fare riferimento a
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [Flashcoders] arguments.caller -- name of this function?

[Hans Wichman]

http://objectpainters.com/blog/2007/07/16/argumentscallee_name/

HTH
JC

On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 6:06 PM, Leonardo Scattola - New Vision srl <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi list!
> I apologize in advance if this question has already been asked... it is my
> little Wednesday puzzle :D
>
> Given this sample code (AS2):
>
> myFunction=function() {
>   // call the second one:
>   trace("Now calling secondFunction");
>   secondFunction();
>   trace("End.");
> }
>
> secondFunction=function() {
>   // who summoned me?
>   trace("arguments.caller= "+arguments.caller);
> }
>
> The question is simple: secondFunction traces (of course)
> "arguments.caller= [type Function]".
> Is there a method to return the name of the caller function (in this case
> "myFunction")?
>
> Thank you.
>
> --
> * Logo New Vision Leonardo Scattola*
> /Research & Development/
> New Vision Group
>
> tel.049.8841146fax049.8840366
> videoconf. newvision.comunicarepro.it 
> web site www.newvision.it 
>
>
>
> Le informazioni contenute in questa e-mail e nei suoi eventuali allegati
> sono da intendersi confidenziali e riservate esclusivamente ai destinatari.
> Ne sono proibiti l'utilizzo e la divulgazione a qualunque fine senza previa
> autorizzazione del mittente.
> Se avete ricevuto questa e-mail per errore, vi preghiamo cortesemente di
> notificarlo (via e-mail, fax, o telefono) al mittente e di distruggerla.
> Tutti i messaggi elettronici sono suscettibili di alterazioni. I dati
> personali vengono trattati esclusivamente per le finalità della presente
> comunicazione in conformità con la legislazione vigente (D.L. 196/2003
> "Codice Privacy").
> Per qualunque informazione si prega di fare riferimento a
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> ___
> 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

Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

[Jordan L. Chilcott]

I'm on the other side of this... I hardly agree with any of these points.

jord

Brian Mays wrote:

Awesome. Thanks. This reinforces some points I've been making to so
colleagues.

Brian Mays


On 7/15/08 3:06 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

  

hi all,
i just published an article called "Charges Against ActionScript 3.0"
covering the things people don't like about ActionScript 3.0.

it's posted on O'Reilly's InsideRIA, here:
http://www.insideria.com/2008/07/the-charges-against-actionscri.html

The article discusses the following issues:

 1. The removal of on()/onClipEvent() from Flash CS3 makes creating
simple interactivity hard.
 2. Getting rid of loaded .swf files is hard.
 3. Casting DisplayObject.parent makes controlling parent movie clips
hard.
 4. The removal of getURL() makes linking hard.
 5. The removal of loadMovie() makes loading .swf files and images hard.
 6. ActionScript 3.0's additional errors make coding cumbersome.
 7. Referring to library symbols dynamically is unintuitive.
 8. Adding custom functionality to manually created text fields, to
all movie clips, or to all buttons is cumbersome.
 9. The removal of duplicateMovieClip() makes cloning a MovieClip
instance (really) hard.

if you have comments, please leave them on the article so i can respond
if necessary.

colin


___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

Re: [Flashcoders] Custom RegExp problem

[elibol]

Hi Adam,

I just wanted to note a few things, to get you on the right track here...

If you're going to extend RegExp, pass vars to the constructor, otherwise
you aren't using the super class at all.

public function CustomRegExp() {
   super("(\d+)(\d{3}(\.|,|$))", "gi");
}

The convert function might then look something like this:

public function convertToCurrency ($val:Number):String {
  var returnString:String = String($val.toFixed(2));
   while (returnString.match(this).length != 0) {
  returnString = (returnString.replace(this, "$1,$2"));
  }
  return returnString;
}


As for the reg ex, since there are no alphas involved, you probably don't
need the i flag set. Since you have g, there isn't a need for the loop. The
function only takes numbers, so you don't need to check for chars ,$. I had
to write a function that would create thousand separators for a number. I
used the following technique, and I came up with this due to my limited
knowledge on regexp, and time constraints. It isn't the most elegant
solution, but it should solve the toughest part of the conversion:

function thousandSeparator(value:Number):String {
  var va:Array = value.toString().split(".");
  va[0] = va[0].replace(new RegExp("(^[0-9]{"+(va[0].length%3 ==
0?3:va[0].length%3)+"}|[0-9]{3})","g"), ",$1").substr(1);
  return va.join(".");
}

You might want to use toFixed(2) in place of toString to get your precision
right, and then it might be a good idea to replace [0-9]'s with d...

Good luck with it,

Melih

blog.computerelibol.com

On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 6:49 AM, Adam Jowett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> Just wondering if anyone more familiar with RegExp can pick what might be
> causing the convertToCurrency function below to crash the Flash IDE and/or
> browser (no problems if publishing from a straight FlashDevelop project for
> some reason). Below is firstly how I call it, and secondly the class itself:
>
>
> ...
>
> private var _global:Object = GlobalObject.vars;
>
> var currencyFormat:Function = new CustomRegExp().convertToCurrency;
> _global.convertToCurrency = currencyFormat;
>
> ...
>
>
> package utils.CustomRegExp
> {
>   public class CustomRegExp extends RegExp
>   {
>   public function CustomRegExp()
>   {
>   }
> public function convertToCurrency ($val:Number):String
>   {
>   var pattern:RegExp = /(\d+)(\d{3}(\.|,|$))/gi;
>   var returnString:String = String($val.toFixed(2));
> while (returnString.match(pattern).length != 0)
>   {
>   returnString = (returnString.replace(pattern, "$1,$2"));
> }
> return returnString;
>   }
>   }
> }
>
>
> If there is an alternative to the above I would love to see it, but still
> curious why the above would cause problems.
>
> Cheers
> Adam
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Flashcoders] hiring

[anuj sharma]

Hi
You might want to try this
http://www.actionscript.org/employment/search_positions.php
Sometimes there are international jobs there too and if you register with
them, they keep on sending you weekly openings.
Anuj


On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 5:29 AM, Romuald Quantin <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> I'm not sure it is the right place to do that but people have been friendly
> on this list, I hope you can help.
>
>
>
> I'll have to hire a flash/flex developer in London UK for a permanent job.
>
>
>
> Can anyone tell me some good place to post an ad?
>
>
>
> I'm not looking for a "general IT job site" but some sites like the job
> section in www.thefwa.com   where I can find good
> developers.
>
> Maybe another mailing list?
>
>
>
> Any info?
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Romuald
>
>
>
> ___
> 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

RE: [Flashcoders] arguments.caller -- name of this function?

[Keith Reinfeld]

Leonardo, 
 
myFunction=function() { 
// call the second one: 
trace("Now calling secondFunction"); 
secondFunction(); 
trace("End."); 
} 
//override the toString() method for myFunction 
myFunction.toString = function() { 
return "myFunction"; 
}; 
secondFunction=function() { 
// who summoned me? 
trace("arguments.caller= "+arguments.caller); 
} 
myFunction(); 
 
Regards, 

-Keith 
http://keithreinfeld.home.comcast.net
 




___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

Re: [Flashcoders] hiring

[Sidney de Koning]

Tell me about it, we are based in Amsterdam and having much difficulty  
getting freelancers.
However we already placed some ads on riajobs.org, and gotten more  
reactions than using headhunters companies (Monster, ComputerFutures  
etc).
Company blogs and direct mailings are also more effective i think.  
(This is specific for the dutch users: Have you tried freelance.nl ? )


Good luck!

Sid


On Jul 16, 2008, at 4:58 PM, Gert-Jan van der Wel wrote:


Thanks Sid!

We're also looking for an ActionScript/Flash developer to join the  
Floorplanner team in Rotterdam, The Netherlands. It quite difficult  
to find good people...


Gert-Jan


Op 16 jul 2008, om 14:39 heeft Sidney de Koning het volgende  
geschreven:



try http://www.riajobs.org/

Sid

On Jul 16, 2008, at 2:29 PM, Romuald Quantin wrote:


Hi,



I'm not sure it is the right place to do that but people have been  
friendly

on this list, I hope you can help.



I'll have to hire a flash/flex developer in London UK for a  
permanent job.




Can anyone tell me some good place to post an ad?



I'm not looking for a "general IT job site" but some sites like  
the job
section in www.thefwa.com   where I can  
find good

developers.

Maybe another mailing list?



Any info?



Thanks



Romuald



___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders



Sidney de Koning
Flash / AIR Developer @ www.funky-monkey.nl
Technical Writer @ www.insideria.com





___
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



Sidney de Koning
Flash / AIR Developer @ www.funky-monkey.nl
Technical Writer @ www.insideria.com





___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

[Flashcoders] arguments.caller -- name of this function?

[Leonardo Scattola - New Vision srl]

Hi list!
I apologize in advance if this question has already been asked... it is 
my little Wednesday puzzle :D


Given this sample code (AS2):

myFunction=function() {
   // call the second one:
   trace("Now calling secondFunction");
   secondFunction();
   trace("End.");
}

secondFunction=function() {
   // who summoned me?
   trace("arguments.caller= "+arguments.caller);
}

The question is simple: secondFunction traces (of course) 
"arguments.caller= [type Function]".
Is there a method to return the name of the caller function (in this 
case "myFunction")?


Thank you.

--
* Logo New Vision Leonardo Scattola*
/Research & Development/
New Vision Group

tel.049.8841146
fax049.8840366 


videoconf. newvision.comunicarepro.it 
web site www.newvision.it 



Le informazioni contenute in questa e-mail e nei suoi eventuali allegati 
sono da intendersi confidenziali e riservate esclusivamente ai 
destinatari. Ne sono proibiti l'utilizzo e la divulgazione a qualunque 
fine senza previa autorizzazione del mittente.
Se avete ricevuto questa e-mail per errore, vi preghiamo cortesemente di 
notificarlo (via e-mail, fax, o telefono) al mittente e di distruggerla.
Tutti i messaggi elettronici sono suscettibili di alterazioni. I dati 
personali vengono trattati esclusivamente per le finalità della presente 
comunicazione in conformità con la legislazione vigente (D.L. 196/2003 
"Codice Privacy").
Per qualunque informazione si prega di fare riferimento a 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

Re: [Flashcoders] as3 class libraries

[Ivan Dembicki]

Hello,


> 3D:
> Papervision 3D
> Away 3D

http://alternativaplatform.com/en/

Geometry:
http://bezier.googlecode.com


-- 
iv
http://www.bezier.ru
http://bezier.googlecode.com
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

Re: [Flashcoders] Performance on Data Passing

[Paul Evans]

On 2 Jul 2008, at 19:03, Manuel Ponce de Leon wrote:
Does anyone have any hints on how to better testthe performance of  
an SWF movie rendering XML data versus some other dataset type  
(JSON, key-value pairs using flashvars, etc)?


take a look at BlazeBench and James Ward's post...

http://www.jamesward.com/wordpress/2007/12/12/blazebench-why-you-want-amf-and-blazeds/

--
Paul Evans
http://www.creative-cognition.co.uk/
http://blog.creacog.co.uk/

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

Re: [Flashcoders] hiring

[Gert-Jan van der Wel]

Thanks Sid!

We're also looking for an ActionScript/Flash developer to join the  
Floorplanner team in Rotterdam, The Netherlands. It quite difficult to  
find good people...


Gert-Jan


Op 16 jul 2008, om 14:39 heeft Sidney de Koning het volgende geschreven:


try http://www.riajobs.org/

Sid

On Jul 16, 2008, at 2:29 PM, Romuald Quantin wrote:


Hi,



I'm not sure it is the right place to do that but people have been  
friendly

on this list, I hope you can help.



I'll have to hire a flash/flex developer in London UK for a  
permanent job.




Can anyone tell me some good place to post an ad?



I'm not looking for a "general IT job site" but some sites like the  
job
section in www.thefwa.com   where I can  
find good

developers.

Maybe another mailing list?



Any info?



Thanks



Romuald



___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders



Sidney de Koning
Flash / AIR Developer @ www.funky-monkey.nl
Technical Writer @ www.insideria.com





___
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

Re: [Flashcoders] "Auto declare stage instance" issue with SWC

[Todd Dominey]

I'll answer my own question, in case others need to know.

The answer was to make the class dynamic so that Flash could access it  
when auto-declaring the instance names.


On Jul 12, 2008, at 10:16 AM, Todd Dominey wrote:


Hi everyone -

Here's my setup. I have a MovieClip named "TimerSymbol" in the  
Library with a base class of "flash.display.MovieClip" assigned to  
it. The class associated with it is public and extends MovieClip.  
"TimerSymbol" contains a MovieClip inside of it with an instance  
name of "icons_mc". "TimerSymbol" is instantiated inside of a parent  
Sprite class, which will serve as the base class of my SWC.


Now, I have "Automatically declare stage instances" ticked "on", and  
I need to leave it on because that's the default setting other  
people would be using.


With that, I'm not directly referring to "icons_mc" in my  
TimerSymbol class to avoid name conflicts. I'm getting the instance  
like so:


public var icons:MovieClip;
icons = getChildByName('icons_mc') as MovieClip;

And that seems to work fine. BUT, the problem emerges when I  
"Convert to Compiled Clip" and publish again from a separate FLA.  
This time I get...


ReferenceError: Error #1056: Cannot create property icons_mc on  
com.dd.observers.Timer.

at flash.display::Sprite/flash.display:Sprite::constructChildren()
at flash.display::Sprite$iinit()
at flash.display::MovieClip$iinit()
(blah blah blah)

Any ideas what could be causing this?
___
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

Re: [Flashcoders] as3 class libraries

[Paul Evans]

On 14 Jul 2008, at 21:41, Corban Baxter wrote:

I am trying to put together a list of some of the best AS3 and Flex
Libraries, Classes and Frameworks we have available


If you decide to publish your list somewhere, perhaps add a column to  
highlight the licence type of each item, which read in conjunction  
with Grant Skinners article could be a real time saver!


http://www.gskinner.com/blog/archives/2008/07/source_code_lic_1.html

--
Paul Evans
http://www.creative-cognition.co.uk/
http://blog.creacog.co.uk/

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

Re: [Flashcoders] hiring

[Paul Evans]

On 16 Jul 2008, at 13:29, Romuald Quantin wrote:
I'll have to hire a flash/flex developer in London UK for a  
permanent job.


http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexjobs/

it mostly carries US based jobs, but I'm in the UK and still scan it

you could also join Flex London User Group, and post a message the the  
forum - someone else has just today...


http://ria.meetup.com/7/

You could also sign up and come along to the next London Flash  
Platform User Group meeting on the 31st...


http://www.lfpug.com/

Personally I don't think there is a problem posting notice of a job/ 
contract to lists such as this as long as it is clear in the subject  
line and ideally that the message directs the reader to a webpage for  
a full description and instructions.


--
Paul Evans
http://www.creative-cognition.co.uk/
http://blog.creacog.co.uk/

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

[Brian Mays]

Awesome. Thanks. This reinforces some points I've been making to so
colleagues.

Brian Mays


On 7/15/08 3:06 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> hi all,
> i just published an article called "Charges Against ActionScript 3.0"
> covering the things people don't like about ActionScript 3.0.
> 
> it's posted on O'Reilly's InsideRIA, here:
> http://www.insideria.com/2008/07/the-charges-against-actionscri.html
> 
> The article discusses the following issues:
> 
>  1. The removal of on()/onClipEvent() from Flash CS3 makes creating
> simple interactivity hard.
>  2. Getting rid of loaded .swf files is hard.
>  3. Casting DisplayObject.parent makes controlling parent movie clips
> hard.
>  4. The removal of getURL() makes linking hard.
>  5. The removal of loadMovie() makes loading .swf files and images hard.
>  6. ActionScript 3.0's additional errors make coding cumbersome.
>  7. Referring to library symbols dynamically is unintuitive.
>  8. Adding custom functionality to manually created text fields, to
> all movie clips, or to all buttons is cumbersome.
>  9. The removal of duplicateMovieClip() makes cloning a MovieClip
> instance (really) hard.
> 
> if you have comments, please leave them on the article so i can respond
> if necessary.
> 
> colin
> ___
> 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

Re: [Flashcoders] hiring

[Sidney de Koning]

try http://www.riajobs.org/

Sid

On Jul 16, 2008, at 2:29 PM, Romuald Quantin wrote:


Hi,



I'm not sure it is the right place to do that but people have been  
friendly

on this list, I hope you can help.



I'll have to hire a flash/flex developer in London UK for a  
permanent job.




Can anyone tell me some good place to post an ad?



I'm not looking for a "general IT job site" but some sites like the  
job
section in www.thefwa.com   where I can find  
good

developers.

Maybe another mailing list?



Any info?



Thanks



Romuald



___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders



Sidney de Koning
Flash / AIR Developer @ www.funky-monkey.nl
Technical Writer @ www.insideria.com





___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

[Flashcoders] hiring

[Romuald Quantin]

Hi,

 

I'm not sure it is the right place to do that but people have been friendly
on this list, I hope you can help.

 

I'll have to hire a flash/flex developer in London UK for a permanent job.

 

Can anyone tell me some good place to post an ad?

 

I'm not looking for a "general IT job site" but some sites like the job
section in www.thefwa.com   where I can find good
developers.

Maybe another mailing list?

 

Any info?

 

Thanks

 

Romuald

 

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

Re: [Flashcoders] as3 class libraries

[Beatrix Krümmer-Frau]

First Hallo "again"
Back to the List - after maybe 6 years without Flash and Flashcoders. 
Finaly got again a pure Flash Job 1 year ago, roling from Flash MX over 
AC2 into AC3 - game development - 3D (my part). Listening to the list 
for a while, here is my first post:

I miss Sandy: http://www.flashsandy.org/ and Cast 3D: 
http://www.cast3d.org/demo

Physics engine built for game developers:
http://www.fisixengine.com/api/

AS3 3D Physics engine:
http://seraf.mediabox.fr/wow-engine/as3-3d-physics-engine-wow-engine/

AS3 isometric programming engine:
http://www.ffilmation.org/website/about/

Tweening and Filters:
http://blog.greensock.com/

Beatrix
*

*

Corban Baxter schrieb:
> I am trying to put together a list of some of the best AS3 and Flex
> Libraries, Classes and Frameworks we have available. I was hoping to
> get as much input form you guys as possible and what you guys use and
> enjoy. Here are some examples I am looking for...
>
> Frameworks:
> GAIA
> MATE
> pureMVC
>
> Video:
> flvplayerlite
>
> Data:
> Flare
>
> Games:
> as3ds
> ape
>
> Animation:
> Tweenlite
> Tweener
> Go
>
> 3D:
> Papervision 3D
> Away 3D
>
> Graphics:
> ActiveWindowBlur
> Reflection
>
> Utilites:
> QueueLoader
> ASMailer
> bulkLoader
>
> API:
> youtube
> flickr
> yahoo maps
>
> Audio:
> ?
>
> If you guys have any more categories and input for my list I would
> appreciate alot. Thanks for the help!
>
>
>   



_
Kostenlos: Die Festplatte im Netz mit 5 GB Speicher!
http://skydrive.live.com/?mkt=de-de___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders