Re: [Flashcoders] Event.COMPLETE Question
> e.target isn't your loader info, its most likely the Loader itself.
loader.contentLoaderInfo.addEventListener()
The LoaderInfo is the target of the event - that's what you added the event
listener to.
trace(event.target);
[LoaderInfo]
Proof that the LoaderInfo is the target is easily derived by tracing the
event.target.
Why don't you just do this?
loader.filters = [myBevel];
addChild(loader);
On 2/22/2010 5:33 AM, Gregory Boland wrote:
the target is where the event bubbles from, and the currentTarget is what
was applied the listener
so what you are looking for is e.target.content and that is whatever you
loaded in
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 4:57 AM, Susan Daywrote:
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 8:31 AM, Steven Sacks
wrote:
Update this line:
var displayObject:DisplayObject = loaderInfo.loader.content;
Updated:
function loaded(e:Event):void
{
var loaderInfo:LoaderInfo = e.target as LoaderInfo;
var displayObject:DisplayObject = loaderInfo.loader.content;
displayObject.width = 257;
displayObject.height = 257;
displayObject.x = myX + 31;
displayObject.y = myY + 31;
var myBevel:BevelFilter = new BevelFilter();
myBevel.type = BitmapFilterType.FULL;
myBevel.distance = 10;
myBevel.highlightColor = 0xFF;
myBevel.shadowColor = 0x00;
myBevel.blurX = 20;
myBevel.blurY = 20;
displayObject.filters = [myBevel];
addChild(displayObject);
e.target.removeEventListener(Event.COMPLETE, loaded);
}
Did the same thing (no correction). Please advise.
TIA,
Susan
___
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 mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
RE: [Flashcoders] Event.COMPLETE Question
> Thanks for the clarification, but that ain't doing it either. // LoaderInfo e.currentTarget // Bitmap e.currentTarget.loader.content // Remove listener e.currentTarget.removeEventListener(Event.COMPLETE, loaded); // Get current jpg var displayObject:DisplayObject = e.currentTarget.loader.content; Your images are unlikely to load in the same order indicated by the switch statement. Your images are likely to display one top of the other, making it seem like you are only getting one. Regards, Keith Reinfeld Home Page: http://keithreinfeld.home.comcast.net ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
RE: [Flashcoders] 2.0 => 3.0
No - I mean just broadcasting events instead of coupling code across timelines. Even if you're not using design patterns or even coding outside the IDE, you don't need to use root. Jason Merrill Bank of America Global Learning Learning & Performance Solutions Join the Bank of America Flash Platform Community and visit our Instructional Technology Design Blog (note: these are for Bank of America employees only) -Original Message- From: flashcoders-boun...@chattyfig.figleaf.com [mailto:flashcoders-boun...@chattyfig.figleaf.com] On Behalf Of Henrik Andersson Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 11:22 AM To: Flash Coders List Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] 2.0 => 3.0 Merrill, Jason wrote: > There are much better ways of doing things. > You mean like using design patterns? Like the Mediator pattern? The main timeline is an excellent choice for that one. I see no reason to not use root to refer to the main timeline if you actually need such a reference. ___ 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] 2.0 => 3.0
>> Well, you use event listeners to call the right event. I meant to type,"you use event listeners to call the right method." Jason Merrill Bank of America Global Learning Learning & Performance Solutions Join the Bank of America Flash Platform Community and visit our Instructional Technology Design Blog (note: these are for Bank of America employees only) ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] 2.0 => 3.0
Lehr, try this... var pArray:Array = new Array(); var mc:MovieClip = pArray[0] as MovieClip; mc.gotoAndStop(2); or... var pArray:Array = new Array(); MovieClip(pArray[0]).gotoAndStop(2); which is closer to your original AS2. On 22 February 2010 17:48, Henrik Andersson wrote: > Merrill, Jason wrote: > >> No - I mean just broadcasting events instead of coupling code across >> timelines. Even if you're not using design patterns or even coding >> outside the IDE, you don't need to use root. >> > > For events you still need an object to dispatch them on. And it really is > just used as window dressing to make people feel good about that same old > code being "better". This is not the only use, but it is one thing that > people keep doing. Events are worse than just calling the right method to > begin with. Events are too loosely coupled if you ask me. If I get the event > source wrong, there is no error raised and so on. Event listeners also can > not return any value. > > Does this mean that I recommend people to stay away from events? No. I only > want people to think before using them. Good things can be abused too. > > Or we could just cut out all this theorist cruff and focus on the issue at > hand. How would you replace the root property? > > I say that there is a limit to how overly complicated you want to make your > program. Most people are not hired to design virtual machines that "other > people" program for, they are hired to actually do the boring work. My point > here is that in reality, you can't be perfect or an elitist. Think about > your goal before you overdo stuff. It is ok to not do stuff the absolutely > cleanest possible way, it's total disasters that you should avoid. > > ___ > 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] 2.0 => 3.0
>> Event listeners also can not return any value. Ha. That isn't true at all, you can send data with events. I do it all the time, and it's not bad practice. >> Events are worse than just calling the right >> method to begin with. Events are too loosely coupled if you ask me. Well, you use event listeners to call the right event. I don't think telling someone to avoid root and use events is elitist at all - especially when it's easy to learn. The only time it's wise to use root, in my opinion, is when you don't know how to do anything else. But using root by it's ver nature is tight coupling code, it's also symptomatic of code lying all over the place. >> For events you still need an object to dispatch them on. Yes, obviously, just like when YOU write "root blah blah" - you have to script that code from an object as well. >> Or we could just cut out all this theorist cruff and focus on the issue at hand. How would you replace the root property? That's exactly what I'm answering, you would replace "root" with event dispatchers and event listeners. I guess root isn't evil, it's just very very ugly. So I think we'll just have to agree to disagree and leave it at that. Jason Merrill Bank of America Global Learning Learning & Performance Solutions Join the Bank of America Flash Platform Community and visit our Instructional Technology Design Blog (note: these are for Bank of America employees only) -Original Message- From: flashcoders-boun...@chattyfig.figleaf.com [mailto:flashcoders-boun...@chattyfig.figleaf.com] On Behalf Of Henrik Andersson Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 11:49 AM To: Flash Coders List Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] 2.0 => 3.0 Merrill, Jason wrote: > No - I mean just broadcasting events instead of coupling code across > timelines. Even if you're not using design patterns or even coding > outside the IDE, you don't need to use root. For events you still need an object to dispatch them on. And it really is just used as window dressing to make people feel good about that same old code being "better". This is not the only use, but it is one thing that people keep doing. Events are worse than just calling the right method to begin with. Events are too loosely coupled if you ask me. If I get the event source wrong, there is no error raised and so on. Event listeners also can not return any value. Does this mean that I recommend people to stay away from events? No. I only want people to think before using them. Good things can be abused too. Or we could just cut out all this theorist cruff and focus on the issue at hand. How would you replace the root property? I say that there is a limit to how overly complicated you want to make your program. Most people are not hired to design virtual machines that "other people" program for, they are hired to actually do the boring work. My point here is that in reality, you can't be perfect or an elitist. Think about your goal before you overdo stuff. It is ok to not do stuff the absolutely cleanest possible way, it's total disasters that you should avoid. ___ 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] 2.0 => 3.0
Merrill, Jason wrote: No - I mean just broadcasting events instead of coupling code across timelines. Even if you're not using design patterns or even coding outside the IDE, you don't need to use root. For events you still need an object to dispatch them on. And it really is just used as window dressing to make people feel good about that same old code being "better". This is not the only use, but it is one thing that people keep doing. Events are worse than just calling the right method to begin with. Events are too loosely coupled if you ask me. If I get the event source wrong, there is no error raised and so on. Event listeners also can not return any value. Does this mean that I recommend people to stay away from events? No. I only want people to think before using them. Good things can be abused too. Or we could just cut out all this theorist cruff and focus on the issue at hand. How would you replace the root property? I say that there is a limit to how overly complicated you want to make your program. Most people are not hired to design virtual machines that "other people" program for, they are hired to actually do the boring work. My point here is that in reality, you can't be perfect or an elitist. Think about your goal before you overdo stuff. It is ok to not do stuff the absolutely cleanest possible way, it's total disasters that you should avoid. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
RE: [Flashcoders] 2.0 => 3.0
Sorry - I am way new to 3.0 - this is code I am trying to convert to help me learn why would this not work: var pArray = new Array(); pArray[0].gotoAndStop(2); or is there a better way to do it in 3 Thanks From: flashcoders-boun...@chattyfig.figleaf.com [flashcoders-boun...@chattyfig.figleaf.com] On Behalf Of Glen Pike [g...@engineeredarts.co.uk] Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 11:15 AM To: Flash Coders List Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] 2.0 => 3.0 Surely using dynamic instance names can be faster than using array lookup in some "instances"? For example, I have a number of movieclip classes, I don't want to extend their functionality by subclassing, so instead of adding an "id" property, I derive the id from the instance name - "btn_0", "btn_1", etc. Messy, but works in some instances and is a case of GTD, no? I may be wrong of course ;) > I am more concerned with people who insist on dynamic instance names > instead of arrays. > ___ > 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 mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] 2.0 => 3.0
Merrill, Jason wrote: There are much better ways of doing things. You mean like using design patterns? Like the Mediator pattern? The main timeline is an excellent choice for that one. I see no reason to not use root to refer to the main timeline if you actually need such a reference. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] 2.0 => 3.0
Surely using dynamic instance names can be faster than using array lookup in some "instances"? For example, I have a number of movieclip classes, I don't want to extend their functionality by subclassing, so instead of adding an "id" property, I derive the id from the instance name - "btn_0", "btn_1", etc. Messy, but works in some instances and is a case of GTD, no? I may be wrong of course ;) I am more concerned with people who insist on dynamic instance names instead of arrays. ___ 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] 2.0 => 3.0
I don't think its elitist at all - I think using root is only asking for trouble. I think it's poor practice, plain and simple, and there is NO reason for it. There are much better ways of doing things. Jason Merrill Bank of America Global Learning Learning & Performance Solutions Join the Bank of America Flash Platform Community and visit our Instructional Technology Design Blog (note: these are for Bank of America employees only) -Original Message- From: flashcoders-boun...@chattyfig.figleaf.com [mailto:flashcoders-boun...@chattyfig.figleaf.com] On Behalf Of Henrik Andersson Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 11:06 AM To: Flash Coders List Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] 2.0 => 3.0 Merrill, Jason wrote: > Well, using root is just bad practice anyway - there's no need for it in > anything you do. That is an elitist view on the matter. I say, think, then code. If you mean the main timeline, use root. I am more concerned with people who insist on dynamic instance names instead of arrays. ___ 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] 2.0 => 3.0
Merrill, Jason wrote: Well, using root is just bad practice anyway - there's no need for it in anything you do. That is an elitist view on the matter. I say, think, then code. If you mean the main timeline, use root. I am more concerned with people who insist on dynamic instance names instead of arrays. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
RE: [Flashcoders] 2.0 => 3.0
Well, using root is just bad practice anyway - there's no need for it in anything you do. Jason Merrill Bank of America Global Learning Learning & Performance Solutions Join the Bank of America Flash Platform Community and visit our Instructional Technology Design Blog (note: these are for Bank of America employees only) -Original Message- From: flashcoders-boun...@chattyfig.figleaf.com [mailto:flashcoders-boun...@chattyfig.figleaf.com] On Behalf Of Lehr, Theodore Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 9:54 AM To: Flash Coders List Subject: [Flashcoders] 2.0 => 3.0 how would I translate: _root["but_"+pArray[i]].gotoAndStop(1); from 2.0 to 3.0? The error I am getting is "Access of undefined property _root. TIA! Ted ___ 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] 2.0 => 3.0
Lehr, Theodore wrote: The error I am getting is "Access of undefined property _root. did you try simply dropping the underscore? The api isn't THAT much different. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
[Flashcoders] 2.0 => 3.0
how would I translate: _root["but_"+pArray[i]].gotoAndStop(1); from 2.0 to 3.0? The error I am getting is "Access of undefined property _root. TIA! Ted ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Event.COMPLETE Question
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Gregory Boland wrote: > e.target isn't your loader info, its most likely the Loader itself. > > the target is where the event bubbles from, and the currentTarget is what > was applied the listener > > so what you are looking for is e.target.content and that is whatever you > loaded in > e.target.content.removeEventListener(Event.COMPLETE, loaded); Thanks for the clarification, but that ain't doing it either. TIA, Susan ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Event.COMPLETE Question
e.target isn't your loader info, its most likely the Loader itself.
the target is where the event bubbles from, and the currentTarget is what
was applied the listener
so what you are looking for is e.target.content and that is whatever you
loaded in
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 4:57 AM, Susan Day wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 8:31 AM, Steven Sacks >wrote:
>
> > Update this line:
> >
> > var displayObject:DisplayObject = loaderInfo.loader.content;
>
>
> Updated:
>
> function loaded(e:Event):void
> {
> var loaderInfo:LoaderInfo = e.target as LoaderInfo;
> var displayObject:DisplayObject = loaderInfo.loader.content;
> displayObject.width = 257;
> displayObject.height = 257;
> displayObject.x = myX + 31;
> displayObject.y = myY + 31;
> var myBevel:BevelFilter = new BevelFilter();
> myBevel.type = BitmapFilterType.FULL;
> myBevel.distance = 10;
> myBevel.highlightColor = 0xFF;
> myBevel.shadowColor = 0x00;
> myBevel.blurX = 20;
> myBevel.blurY = 20;
> displayObject.filters = [myBevel];
> addChild(displayObject);
> e.target.removeEventListener(Event.COMPLETE, loaded);
> }
>
> Did the same thing (no correction). Please advise.
> TIA,
> Susan
> ___
> 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] Event.COMPLETE Question
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 8:31 AM, Steven Sacks wrote:
> Update this line:
>
> var displayObject:DisplayObject = loaderInfo.loader.content;
Updated:
function loaded(e:Event):void
{
var loaderInfo:LoaderInfo = e.target as LoaderInfo;
var displayObject:DisplayObject = loaderInfo.loader.content;
displayObject.width = 257;
displayObject.height = 257;
displayObject.x = myX + 31;
displayObject.y = myY + 31;
var myBevel:BevelFilter = new BevelFilter();
myBevel.type = BitmapFilterType.FULL;
myBevel.distance = 10;
myBevel.highlightColor = 0xFF;
myBevel.shadowColor = 0x00;
myBevel.blurX = 20;
myBevel.blurY = 20;
displayObject.filters = [myBevel];
addChild(displayObject);
e.target.removeEventListener(Event.COMPLETE, loaded);
}
Did the same thing (no correction). Please advise.
TIA,
Susan
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Event.COMPLETE Question
Update this line: var displayObject:DisplayObject = loaderInfo.loader.content; ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Event.COMPLETE Question
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Keith Reinfeld
wrote:
> All but the last Loader is being over written.
> Put each Loader into an array.
>
> var req:URLRequest = new URLRequest(path);
> loaderArray[counter] = new Loader();
> loaderArray[counter].load(req);
>
> loaderArray[counter].contentLoaderInfo.addEventListener(Event.COMPLETE,loade
> d);
>
> This way each Loader object is preserved in a separate element of the
> array.
>
>
> Don't forget to remove your listeners.
>
I'm missing something. I added the variable loaderArray as an Array which I
believe took care of one problem; however, I apparently am not correctly
identifying the e.target in the loader function:
var req:URLRequest = new URLRequest(path);
var loaderArray:Array = new Array();
loaderArray[counter] = new Loader();
loaderArray[counter].load(req);
loaderArray[counter].contentLoaderInfo.addEventListener(Event.COMPLETE,loaded);
}
function loaded(e:Event):void
{
var loaderInfo:LoaderInfo = e.target as LoaderInfo;
var displayObject:DisplayObject = loaderInfo.content;
displayObject.width = 257;
displayObject.height = 257;
displayObject.x = myX + 31;
displayObject.y = myY + 31;
var myBevel:BevelFilter = new BevelFilter();
myBevel.type = BitmapFilterType.FULL;
myBevel.distance = 10;
myBevel.highlightColor = 0xFF;
myBevel.shadowColor = 0x00;
myBevel.blurX = 20;
myBevel.blurY = 20;
displayObject.filters = [myBevel];
addChild(displayObject);
e.target.removeEventListener(Event.COMPLETE, loaded);
}
Please help me see what I'm missing.
TIA,
Susan
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
