Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Ok let's retry... plain text this time. Hello there, After having read that post you signaled (and the ones related to GC issues), I wrote a really simple Air application that scans one or more directories for actionscript files and checks their content to see whether or not every addEventListener has a corresponding removeEventListener set. You can find it here: http://www.genereavventura.com/app/addeventseeker/index.html Sometimes it can be useful. Paolo P.S. I apologizes for having sent this message twice... Merrill, Jason ha scritto: Does anyone know if Adobe is fixing this huge FP9 problem? http://www.gskinner.com/blog/archives/2008/04/failure_to_unlo.html Jason Merrill Bank of America GTO and Risk LLD Solutions Design Development eTools Multimedia 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 GTO Innovative Learning Blog subscribe. ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
If I recall correctly, the problem only exists with event listeners for Timer, stage and EnterFrame event listeners. Stage listeners are easy to clean up. If you ever attach a listener to the stage, add it within the ADDED_TO_STAGE handler, make sure you remove it within the REMOTED_FROM_STAGE handler. I am not sure, but I think using a weak listener here would do the trick as well and would prevent you from needing to remove it. As for Timer and EnterFrame events, make sure you never run them forever. In all cases I can think of, there is no need to let them run forever. Running them forever is just lazy programming. If you have a usecase where one of these would run forever I am interested in it :) As for normal events, this has (as far as I can tell) nothing to do with problem mentioned by grant. Greetz Erik On 4/28/08, Paolo Nicoletti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok let's retry... plain text this time. Hello there, After having read that post you signaled (and the ones related to GC issues), I wrote a really simple Air application that scans one or more directories for actionscript files and checks their content to see whether or not every addEventListener has a corresponding removeEventListener set. You can find it here: http://www.genereavventura.com/app/addeventseeker/index.html Sometimes it can be useful. Paolo P.S. I apologizes for having sent this message twice... ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Hello Erik, I always try to clean every addEventListener I put in my code, but, as you said, Timer, Stage and EnterFrame events are in fact the ones that cause the problems. In fact this little application is useful only for tracking event listeners that the programmer has forgotten to remove. This can happen sometimes, at least to me ;-) On the other hands, the application is useful also to get a sense of the code written by third parties in the case you have to load their assets in your main container. Paolo EECOLOR ha scritto: If I recall correctly, the problem only exists with event listeners for Timer, stage and EnterFrame event listeners. Stage listeners are easy to clean up. If you ever attach a listener to the stage, add it within the ADDED_TO_STAGE handler, make sure you remove it within the REMOTED_FROM_STAGE handler. I am not sure, but I think using a weak listener here would do the trick as well and would prevent you from needing to remove it. As for Timer and EnterFrame events, make sure you never run them forever. In all cases I can think of, there is no need to let them run forever. Running them forever is just lazy programming. If you have a usecase where one of these would run forever I am interested in it :) As for normal events, this has (as far as I can tell) nothing to do with problem mentioned by grant. Greetz Erik On 4/28/08, Paolo Nicoletti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok let's retry... plain text this time. Hello there, After having read that post you signaled (and the ones related to GC issues), I wrote a really simple Air application that scans one or more directories for actionscript files and checks their content to see whether or not every addEventListener has a corresponding removeEventListener set. You can find it here: http://www.genereavventura.com/app/addeventseeker/index.html Sometimes it can be useful. Paolo P.S. I apologizes for having sent this message twice... ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders -- Change Signature Murphy's First Law: Nothing is as easy as it looks. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
To put a practical question out about this. I'm setting up something that is more or less a game with levels. Each level has a different set of movieclips as its background graphics and enemies for the level. I store all assets for a single level in an external swf, and using techniques we've talked about before on the list (swc + getDefinitionByName) use these assets once they're loaded in via the swf. The plan was then to dump the assets once the level ends and load a new level's assets. The game is small enough that I can conceivably tolerate all level assets being in memory by the time the game is done. What I need to know is, should I NOT treat the data as if it's unloaded, given FP9+AS3 behavior? Because if the player revisits a level, I would normally reload the asset swf for that level ... now I wonder if that would make a duplicate copy of the assets in memory? There wouldn't be two copies of the swf's contents in memory because they'd have identical class definitions... right... or maybe not? Now I'm leaning towards an architecture that says: First time you play a level, load the assets for it, and keep it around always. Next time you play that level, the assets are already loaded. -jonathan On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Paul Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I find it rather bizarre that people feel that it's necessary to beat a drum about this. I doubt that Adobe are sitting back on the issues raised. The thread has the Air of an hysterical mob. It's amazing how so many people have produced fantastic systems using Actionscript 3 in spite of the gloom and doom spouted here. From what I've read, the FP9 garbage collection is pretty much standard technology for object based systems - you can't just discard objects that have references to them. The real problem seems to be related to the other infrastructure that creates multiple object references that aren't always removable. I'm not saying bthere isn't a problem, just that it's not worthy of the histeria being generated. I understand completely it can be a serious issue for some people. Anyway, I'll express some faith that Adobe will resolve the issues - I won't be rolling back to AS2 despite the expert advice of some. I'll consign a lot of this thread to the same place as the 'end of the world is nigh' material that those people with placards dispense. No need to hand me a flaming torch just yet.. - Original Message - From: Chris Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Flash Coders List flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 6:40 PM Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem? ON TOPIC: I can see that most of us feel very strongly about this bug. Adobe has made it clear that their formal channel to do something about it is to vote in their ticketing system for the bug. If there already is a bug, can someone link to it? Otherwise let's get a bug in there. And then let's vote for it. I'm pretty sure that based upon the support here we can make this the #1 bug in their database. Apologies if someone has already mentioned this. This thread is long and noisy. C ___ 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 -- -jonathan howe :: 404.434.2321 :: 180 High St Apt 26 Portland, ME 04101 ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
dear Jonathan, and what if Adobe fixes this in a near future? Your code would be broken... So, I don't think is a good idea to write code that needs this feature of Flash Player. []'s andrei On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 8:00 AM, jonathan howe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To put a practical question out about this. I'm setting up something that is more or less a game with levels. Each level has a different set of movieclips as its background graphics and enemies for the level. I store all assets for a single level in an external swf, and using techniques we've talked about before on the list (swc + getDefinitionByName) use these assets once they're loaded in via the swf. The plan was then to dump the assets once the level ends and load a new level's assets. The game is small enough that I can conceivably tolerate all level assets being in memory by the time the game is done. What I need to know is, should I NOT treat the data as if it's unloaded, given FP9+AS3 behavior? Because if the player revisits a level, I would normally reload the asset swf for that level ... now I wonder if that would make a duplicate copy of the assets in memory? There wouldn't be two copies of the swf's contents in memory because they'd have identical class definitions... right... or maybe not? Now I'm leaning towards an architecture that says: First time you play a level, load the assets for it, and keep it around always. Next time you play that level, the assets are already loaded. -jonathan On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Paul Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I find it rather bizarre that people feel that it's necessary to beat a drum about this. I doubt that Adobe are sitting back on the issues raised. The thread has the Air of an hysterical mob. It's amazing how so many people have produced fantastic systems using Actionscript 3 in spite of the gloom and doom spouted here. From what I've read, the FP9 garbage collection is pretty much standard technology for object based systems - you can't just discard objects that have references to them. The real problem seems to be related to the other infrastructure that creates multiple object references that aren't always removable. I'm not saying bthere isn't a problem, just that it's not worthy of the histeria being generated. I understand completely it can be a serious issue for some people. Anyway, I'll express some faith that Adobe will resolve the issues - I won't be rolling back to AS2 despite the expert advice of some. I'll consign a lot of this thread to the same place as the 'end of the world is nigh' material that those people with placards dispense. No need to hand me a flaming torch just yet.. - Original Message - From: Chris Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Flash Coders List flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 6:40 PM Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem? ON TOPIC: I can see that most of us feel very strongly about this bug. Adobe has made it clear that their formal channel to do something about it is to vote in their ticketing system for the bug. If there already is a bug, can someone link to it? Otherwise let's get a bug in there. And then let's vote for it. I'm pretty sure that based upon the support here we can make this the #1 bug in their database. Apologies if someone has already mentioned this. This thread is long and noisy. C ___ 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 -- -jonathan howe :: 404.434.2321 :: 180 High St Apt 26 Portland, ME 04101 ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
from my tests so far, this creates only one reference targetable by your code, but two instances sit in memory ... and some time after a new instance is created (given the complexity of what's created in this newly created instance), everything crashes cedric if the player revisits a level, I would normally reload the asset swf for that level ... now I wonder if that would make a duplicate copy of the assets in memory? There wouldn't be two copies of the swf's contents in memory because they'd have identical class definitions... right... or maybe not? ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
@andrei Well, the alternative that I suggested at the end would be to just keep track of the swfs that I had loaded and not go through the steps of attempting to unload them described in previous posts. So, it would only be broken after the bug fix in the sense that I could ideally be releasing the memory, but it would still work. It's just sort of like building a library of assets on demand, but never emptying that library. Obviously this would not work for someone creating a huge app. @cedric That's exactly what I was afraid of! Good to know that I should take the safer, if less ideal, approach On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 7:27 AM, Cedric Muller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: from my tests so far, this creates only one reference targetable by your code, but two instances sit in memory ... and some time after a new instance is created (given the complexity of what's created in this newly created instance), everything crashes cedric if the player revisits a level, I would normally reload the asset swf for that level ... now I wonder if that would make a duplicate copy of the assets in memory? There wouldn't be two copies of the swf's contents in memory because they'd have identical class definitions... right... or maybe not? ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders -- -jonathan howe :: 404.434.2321 :: 180 High St Apt 26 Portland, ME 04101 ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
I think any kind of fix they implement now would have to have some level of backwards-compatibility. Like passing a boolean which indicates whether you want to fully unload the movie or not. It's been too long without a fix for that in my opinion. Piers On 16 Apr 2008, at 12:19, Andrei Thomaz wrote: dear Jonathan, and what if Adobe fixes this in a near future? Your code would be broken... So, I don't think is a good idea to write code that needs this feature of Flash Player. []'s andrei On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 8:00 AM, jonathan howe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To put a practical question out about this. I'm setting up something that is more or less a game with levels. Each level has a different set of movieclips as its background graphics and enemies for the level. I store all assets for a single level in an external swf, and using techniques we've talked about before on the list (swc + getDefinitionByName) use these assets once they're loaded in via the swf. The plan was then to dump the assets once the level ends and load a new level's assets. The game is small enough that I can conceivably tolerate all level assets being in memory by the time the game is done. What I need to know is, should I NOT treat the data as if it's unloaded, given FP9+AS3 behavior? Because if the player revisits a level, I would normally reload the asset swf for that level ... now I wonder if that would make a duplicate copy of the assets in memory? There wouldn't be two copies of the swf's contents in memory because they'd have identical class definitions... right... or maybe not? Now I'm leaning towards an architecture that says: First time you play a level, load the assets for it, and keep it around always. Next time you play that level, the assets are already loaded. -jonathan On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Paul Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I find it rather bizarre that people feel that it's necessary to beat a drum about this. I doubt that Adobe are sitting back on the issues raised. The thread has the Air of an hysterical mob. It's amazing how so many people have produced fantastic systems using Actionscript 3 in spite of the gloom and doom spouted here. From what I've read, the FP9 garbage collection is pretty much standard technology for object based systems - you can't just discard objects that have references to them. The real problem seems to be related to the other infrastructure that creates multiple object references that aren't always removable. I'm not saying bthere isn't a problem, just that it's not worthy of the histeria being generated. I understand completely it can be a serious issue for some people. Anyway, I'll express some faith that Adobe will resolve the issues - I won't be rolling back to AS2 despite the expert advice of some. I'll consign a lot of this thread to the same place as the 'end of the world is nigh' material that those people with placards dispense. No need to hand me a flaming torch just yet.. - Original Message - From: Chris Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Flash Coders List flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 6:40 PM Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem? ON TOPIC: I can see that most of us feel very strongly about this bug. Adobe has made it clear that their formal channel to do something about it is to vote in their ticketing system for the bug. If there already is a bug, can someone link to it? Otherwise let's get a bug in there. And then let's vote for it. I'm pretty sure that based upon the support here we can make this the #1 bug in their database. Apologies if someone has already mentioned this. This thread is long and noisy. C ___ 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 -- -jonathan howe :: 404.434.2321 :: 180 High St Apt 26 Portland, ME 04101 ___ 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0207 631 3278 ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
hmm, as in: myMovie.unload (false); which would then be documented as: Unload unloads your movie except when false is passed Feels...wrong somehow;) On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Piers Cowburn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think any kind of fix they implement now would have to have some level of backwards-compatibility. Like passing a boolean which indicates whether you want to fully unload the movie or not. It's been too long without a fix for that in my opinion. Piers On 16 Apr 2008, at 12:19, Andrei Thomaz wrote: dear Jonathan, and what if Adobe fixes this in a near future? Your code would be broken... So, I don't think is a good idea to write code that needs this feature of Flash Player. []'s andrei On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 8:00 AM, jonathan howe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To put a practical question out about this. I'm setting up something that is more or less a game with levels. Each level has a different set of movieclips as its background graphics and enemies for the level. I store all assets for a single level in an external swf, and using techniques we've talked about before on the list (swc + getDefinitionByName) use these assets once they're loaded in via the swf. The plan was then to dump the assets once the level ends and load a new level's assets. The game is small enough that I can conceivably tolerate all level assets being in memory by the time the game is done. What I need to know is, should I NOT treat the data as if it's unloaded, given FP9+AS3 behavior? Because if the player revisits a level, I would normally reload the asset swf for that level ... now I wonder if that would make a duplicate copy of the assets in memory? There wouldn't be two copies of the swf's contents in memory because they'd have identical class definitions... right... or maybe not? Now I'm leaning towards an architecture that says: First time you play a level, load the assets for it, and keep it around always. Next time you play that level, the assets are already loaded. -jonathan On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Paul Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I find it rather bizarre that people feel that it's necessary to beat a drum about this. I doubt that Adobe are sitting back on the issues raised. The thread has the Air of an hysterical mob. It's amazing how so many people have produced fantastic systems using Actionscript 3 in spite of the gloom and doom spouted here. From what I've read, the FP9 garbage collection is pretty much standard technology for object based systems - you can't just discard objects that have references to them. The real problem seems to be related to the other infrastructure that creates multiple object references that aren't always removable. I'm not saying bthere isn't a problem, just that it's not worthy of the histeria being generated. I understand completely it can be a serious issue for some people. Anyway, I'll express some faith that Adobe will resolve the issues - I won't be rolling back to AS2 despite the expert advice of some. I'll consign a lot of this thread to the same place as the 'end of the world is nigh' material that those people with placards dispense. No need to hand me a flaming torch just yet.. - Original Message - From: Chris Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Flash Coders List flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 6:40 PM Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem? ON TOPIC: I can see that most of us feel very strongly about this bug. Adobe has made it clear that their formal channel to do something about it is to vote in their ticketing system for the bug. If there already is a bug, can someone link to it? Otherwise let's get a bug in there. And then let's vote for it. I'm pretty sure that based upon the support here we can make this the #1 bug in their database. Apologies if someone has already mentioned this. This thread is long and noisy. C ___ 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 -- -jonathan howe :: 404.434.2321 :: 180 High St Apt 26 Portland, ME 04101 ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
hmmm, that's not so bad... I'm kinda partial to: myMovie.forceUnload() or myMovie.noSeriouslyUnload() Although this also has it's own sort of personal charm: myMovie.iDontCareIfYouHaveListeners_DIE_DAMN_YOU_DIE() ; Sorry, read this after my morning caffeine rush hit and couldn't help it. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
On Apr 16, 2008, at 9:49 AM, Jer Brand wrote: myMovie.iDontCareIfYouHaveListeners_DIE_DAMN_YOU_DIE() ; LOL. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
- Original Message - From: Jer Brand [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Flash Coders List flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 2:49 PM Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem? hmmm, that's not so bad... I'm kinda partial to: myMovie.forceUnload() or myMovie.noSeriouslyUnload() Although this also has it's own sort of personal charm: myMovie.iDontCareIfYouHaveListeners_DIE_DAMN_YOU_DIE() ; LOL In terms of garbage collection, my guess would be that the GC doesn't really know what use an object is being put to, it's just interested in clearing up memory references that are no longer used, so strictly speaking this isn't the GCs fault. In terms of freeing up references from event listeners, the real problem is in tracking them down. I don't know if there's a single data structure that can be used to find all event listeners - even if there is how easy is it to know that it's referring to an object that belongs to a movie that's going to be unloaded? My 30 second thoughts about this is that it would require the unload code to compare all event listener targets with objects associated with the movie, then it could forcibly remove those listeners. Sounds pretty hairy to me if you have to do that comparison. As much as everyone is begging for a forced unload (no matter what,) there's a danger it would introduce another bad problem whereby the developer has left references to the loaded movie in their code after the movie has gone and the whole thing will go kaboom when they are used. I've no wish to return to C++ thanks. Paul ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Is there any conceivable way that such a thing could be built as a custom class, should Adobe choose to ignore the masses? .m On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Jer Brand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hmmm, that's not so bad... I'm kinda partial to: myMovie.forceUnload() or myMovie.noSeriouslyUnload() Although this also has it's own sort of personal charm: myMovie.iDontCareIfYouHaveListeners_DIE_DAMN_YOU_DIE() ; Sorry, read this after my morning caffeine rush hit and couldn't help it. ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Every SWF to be loaded would need an instance of that custom class and register its events, etc. with it so a method could be called on it to blow it up. I think. Seems like it would be a pretty monstrous booger to do and implement. On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Matt S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there any conceivable way that such a thing could be built as a custom class, should Adobe choose to ignore the masses? .m On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Jer Brand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hmmm, that's not so bad... I'm kinda partial to: myMovie.forceUnload() or myMovie.noSeriouslyUnload() Although this also has it's own sort of personal charm: myMovie.iDontCareIfYouHaveListeners_DIE_DAMN_YOU_DIE() ; Sorry, read this after my morning caffeine rush hit and couldn't help it. ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
You can use BulkLoader to catch your downloaded asset: http://code.google.com/p/bulk-loader/ L jonathan howe a écrit : To put a practical question out about this. I'm setting up something that is more or less a game with levels. Each level has a different set of movieclips as its background graphics and enemies for the level. I store all assets for a single level in an external swf, and using techniques we've talked about before on the list (swc + getDefinitionByName) use these assets once they're loaded in via the swf. The plan was then to dump the assets once the level ends and load a new level's assets. The game is small enough that I can conceivably tolerate all level assets being in memory by the time the game is done. What I need to know is, should I NOT treat the data as if it's unloaded, given FP9+AS3 behavior? Because if the player revisits a level, I would normally reload the asset swf for that level ... now I wonder if that would make a duplicate copy of the assets in memory? There wouldn't be two copies of the swf's contents in memory because they'd have identical class definitions... right... or maybe not? Now I'm leaning towards an architecture that says: First time you play a level, load the assets for it, and keep it around always. Next time you play that level, the assets are already loaded. -jonathan On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Paul Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I find it rather bizarre that people feel that it's necessary to beat a drum about this. I doubt that Adobe are sitting back on the issues raised. The thread has the Air of an hysterical mob. It's amazing how so many people have produced fantastic systems using Actionscript 3 in spite of the gloom and doom spouted here. From what I've read, the FP9 garbage collection is pretty much standard technology for object based systems - you can't just discard objects that have references to them. The real problem seems to be related to the other infrastructure that creates multiple object references that aren't always removable. I'm not saying bthere isn't a problem, just that it's not worthy of the histeria being generated. I understand completely it can be a serious issue for some people. Anyway, I'll express some faith that Adobe will resolve the issues - I won't be rolling back to AS2 despite the expert advice of some. I'll consign a lot of this thread to the same place as the 'end of the world is nigh' material that those people with placards dispense. No need to hand me a flaming torch just yet.. - Original Message - From: Chris Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Flash Coders List flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 6:40 PM Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem? ON TOPIC: I can see that most of us feel very strongly about this bug. Adobe has made it clear that their formal channel to do something about it is to vote in their ticketing system for the bug. If there already is a bug, can someone link to it? Otherwise let's get a bug in there. And then let's vote for it. I'm pretty sure that based upon the support here we can make this the #1 bug in their database. Apologies if someone has already mentioned this. This thread is long and noisy. C ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
I think eric is already aware of bulk loader ;) http://www.ericd.net/2007/11/as3-class-bulkloader.html On 4/16/08, laurent [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can use BulkLoader to catch your downloaded asset: http://code.google.com/p/bulk-loader/ L jonathan howe a écrit : To put a practical question out about this. I'm setting up something that is more or less a game with levels. Each level has a different set of movieclips as its background graphics and enemies for the level. I store all assets for a single level in an external swf, and using techniques we've talked about before on the list (swc + getDefinitionByName) use these assets once they're loaded in via the swf. The plan was then to dump the assets once the level ends and load a new level's assets. The game is small enough that I can conceivably tolerate all level assets being in memory by the time the game is done. What I need to know is, should I NOT treat the data as if it's unloaded, given FP9+AS3 behavior? Because if the player revisits a level, I would normally reload the asset swf for that level ... now I wonder if that would make a duplicate copy of the assets in memory? There wouldn't be two copies of the swf's contents in memory because they'd have identical class definitions... right... or maybe not? Now I'm leaning towards an architecture that says: First time you play a level, load the assets for it, and keep it around always. Next time you play that level, the assets are already loaded. -jonathan On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Paul Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I find it rather bizarre that people feel that it's necessary to beat a drum about this. I doubt that Adobe are sitting back on the issues raised. The thread has the Air of an hysterical mob. It's amazing how so many people have produced fantastic systems using Actionscript 3 in spite of the gloom and doom spouted here. From what I've read, the FP9 garbage collection is pretty much standard technology for object based systems - you can't just discard objects that have references to them. The real problem seems to be related to the other infrastructure that creates multiple object references that aren't always removable. I'm not saying bthere isn't a problem, just that it's not worthy of the histeria being generated. I understand completely it can be a serious issue for some people. Anyway, I'll express some faith that Adobe will resolve the issues - I won't be rolling back to AS2 despite the expert advice of some. I'll consign a lot of this thread to the same place as the 'end of the world is nigh' material that those people with placards dispense. No need to hand me a flaming torch just yet.. - Original Message - From: Chris Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Flash Coders List flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 6:40 PM Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem? ON TOPIC: I can see that most of us feel very strongly about this bug. Adobe has made it clear that their formal channel to do something about it is to vote in their ticketing system for the bug. If there already is a bug, can someone link to it? Otherwise let's get a bug in there. And then let's vote for it. I'm pretty sure that based upon the support here we can make this the #1 bug in their database. Apologies if someone has already mentioned this. This thread is long and noisy. C ___ 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 -- ...helmut ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
This always sent me to the colliflowers. Important things should work as intended. It is not our role to do main bugs feedback (as this one is). Is Adobe paying people for finding such obvious bugs ? Cedric Francis Cheng wrote: Grant's post is helpful because he discusses the issue in such detail, but it would be even more helpful to have a concrete test case that exhibits this problem. Francis, With all due respect, the Flash team knows about this, and they don't need any more concrete test cases. We've got better things to do than play into Adobe's attempt to buy time by deflecting it back on the developers to come up with examples while the Flash team tries to get out of their blunder. It's clear that Grant had discussions with Adobe before he wrote that blog post and I'm certain that others have approached the Flash player team with this issue for awhile. Nothing has been done to fix it, so you end up with a public exposure of the issue, as Grant has done. The Flash player team has egg on its face because in AS2 if you unload a swf, it unloads, and in AS3, it doesn't. Period end of statement. The Flash GC engine's inner workings is something that nobody outside of Adobe has access into and we can't possibly make tests that demonstrate whether it is or isn't working. The proof is in the pudding and Grant's post is all the evidence you need. Let's not get into a situation where we are insulting each other's intelligence by acting like the Flash team hasn't been aware of this issue for quite some time. The Flash team is well aware of it, they know why it exists and they know it's difficult to fix. In all likelihood, they knew about it before any developer discovered it. I mean, after all, it works exactly like it was coded to work. It's not technically a bug, it's an engineering decision that is coming back to haunt them. ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
WTF ?? Steven Sacks a écrit : Thanks for the link to Alex Harui's post, Francis. It unquestionably supports my stance that only advanced developers should be using AS3 and everyone else (95% of Flash developers) should stick with AS1/AS2. Bullshit This issue of not unloading swfs unless you explicitly turn everything off inside it is another prime reason why only expert developers should be coding AS3. Bullcrap The fact that it doesn't actually work even when you do requires a high level of programming skill to manage correctly. This is not the realm of designers, animators and low to mid level Flash developers. Who are you for god sake ? I know who you are it's just to mean it means nothing. Nobody wants to acknowledge the strictness in AS3 is not merely syntax, but extends to the entire way you develop. Most Flash developers out there are not strict or disciplined programmers. Nice. sources ? I don't ask for your clean code here. AS2's looseness (and the ability to unload swfs) is still best for creative Flash development except in the trained hands of Flash experts who know how to manage the memory management issues. yeah we know creatives are just a bunch of troubadour...nearly monkeys, give them bananas and they'll have fun. If the GC implementation in Flash was truly transparent, then somebody would be able to explain why Grant's localConnection hack to force the GC to run worked. The Flash team would also provide some API methods into it. There is no API to the GC, therefore it's implementation is not transparent. True they must be something hidden by the team, something nasty, their own shit I think. Remember shit is the essence of the world everything grows out of shit. And to the guy who said Disney doesn't give a shit, you're wrong. Disney is undergoing a major overhaul of all their Flash content to AS3. They've been in touch with Adobe about this. Let's not spread misinformation here. I think Adobe has done enough. You can't even read you mail box...I don't know who's misinforming people here, where do you glance your informations, from true moment of inspiration or you work for the aliens...? Laurent Quoting Dsiney, Hey man you know how much money we make in our parks, on exploiting poor students, comedians, other unknown artists make them play Dingo or Donal Duck ;) What is memory used for in a computer ? Memory is dangerous man. ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
The fact is: unloading a SWF (or sound) does not UNLOAD its content The fact: this is not fair, this is not professionnal, even Flash 5 people wouldn't admit such. Having to build extra methods to remove (trying to do it with a clean twist) everything has never been a problem for me (I am a CPU waster when it comes to unregistering things). As of now, I can unload content, but I have to implement special methods .. like DIE (); ... and I addEventListeners and I removeEventListeners to the loaded content, shameful. But I doubt Adobe missed this big problem. I *feel* this was let in the wild, as no one ever loads + unloads content with Flash :D (I am so serious here, besides PV3D, the rest is pure crap) Everyone is doing calculators (financial, mortgage, mathematical, poetical, cartoonesque, ...) with Air ,and poor weak datagrids with Flex :D this is sad, this is sadso the guys that drive (or drove) Flash higher can now buy some LEGO kit and do better things... again: sad (and irrealistic, but I hope you get the point) It seems we are back (actually, ... we never left) to when FLASH IDE would crash when querying a PHP page (or any other script), or when content was double loaded in the IDE. Had discussions with Macromedia back then, they were like 'huh ? what ? please give us examples'... then there was dozen of people reporting the same bug, and now we know this bug has been around since FLASH MX AND NEVER SOLVED SINCE THEN. So ? Has Adobe received ANY examples ? Has Adobe never achieved to reproduce this horrible bug ? I feel like Alice, stranded on a planet of cards... Is COLDFUSION impacted ? nope :P follow my logic ? so, what's the deal with unloading SWFs ? :P Is Adobe preparing the way for its topnotch new method to load/unload content , will it be another NEW extra cool flavor of the Flash Platform? I guess this will be called 'AENIMA - Backdoor way' Is Adobe such a Microsoft ??? I am fearful, frigthened by the dark I am absolutely amazed at the liberty that you have taken in passing off your assumptions and opinions as fact. It unquestionably supports my stance that only advanced developers should be using AS3 and everyone else (95% of Flash developers) should stick with AS1/AS2. Can you prove this with hard statistics? The fact that it doesn't actually work even when you do requires a high level of programming skill to manage correctly. You even used the word 'fact' this time. Most Flash developers out there are not strict or disciplined programmers. Once again, this is nothing more than opinion. Let's not spread misinformation here. I think Adobe has done enough. The sheer irony of this statement is astounding. Steve, your conspiracy theories and posturing is doing nothing to cement professional opinions of your abilities and character. Your intellect is entirely eclipsed by the collective intelligence of the flash player team and only a fool would suggest they are not doing anything to fix it. There are things you can do besides bickering and making accusations that will actually HELP the problem. Write an article, explore alternate solutions, submit a wish list, etc. Be constructive not destructive. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steven Sacks Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 3:28 PM To: Flash Coders List Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem? Thanks for the link to Alex Harui's post, Francis. It unquestionably supports my stance that only advanced developers should be using AS3 and everyone else (95% of Flash developers) should stick with AS1/AS2. This issue of not unloading swfs unless you explicitly turn everything off inside it is another prime reason why only expert developers should be coding AS3. The fact that it doesn't actually work even when you do requires a high level of programming skill to manage correctly. This is not the realm of designers, animators and low to mid level Flash developers. Nobody wants to acknowledge the strictness in AS3 is not merely syntax, but extends to the entire way you develop. Most Flash developers out there are not strict or disciplined programmers. AS2's looseness (and the ability to unload swfs) is still best for creative Flash development except in the trained hands of Flash experts who know how to manage the memory management issues. If the GC implementation in Flash was truly transparent, then somebody would be able to explain why Grant's localConnection hack to force the GC to run worked. The Flash team would also provide some API methods into it. There is no API to the GC, therefore it's implementation is not transparent. And to the guy who said Disney doesn't give a shit, you're wrong. Disney is undergoing a major overhaul of all their Flash content to AS3. They've been in touch with Adobe about this. Let's not spread misinformation here. I
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
As a sidenote. The GC is not public. You should never call a method directly on the GC. Do not use it in order to clean up memory. This fails (fatally: crashes on the way). If the GC implementation in Flash was truly transparent, then somebody would be able to explain why Grant's localConnection hack to force the GC to run worked. The Flash team would also provide some API methods into it. There is no API to the GC, therefore it's implementation is not transparent. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Put your handbags down people. The guy swore a few times - deal with it remember that Stephen swore first - I don't hear you having a go at him. Just because a guy's English ain't as good as your own is not a reason to start belittling him, especially where we can all see you. Mum says, enough. Talk about code. :o Matt S. wrote: You shot who in the what now? On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 8:13 PM, laurent [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Certainly not the first one, perhaps a mix of the two last you wrote. There's way of doing things. And way to say as if as a professionnal way totally unprofessionnal things. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders -- Glen Pike 01326 218440 www.glenpike.co.uk http://www.glenpike.co.uk ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Glen Pike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just because a guy's English ain't as good as your own is not a reason to start belittling him, especially where we can all see you. I'm not belittling him because of his english. Je suis sur qu'il pourrais me moquer a cause de mon francais debile. My real issue is that Steven, while no doubt heated, was keeping it focused on the code, while Laurent inexplicably spiralled it off into the personal with a series of totally OT attacks. Mum says, enough. Talk about code. :o And thats my last word on the subject ;) .m ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
RE: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
People please - can we keep this thing ON TOPIC !!! Last thing my inbox needs is handbag wars bouncing across the atlantic. If you can keep it focused on the bug and flash related issue then take thr ting off list !!! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Matt S. Sent: Tue 15/04/2008 14:18 To: Flash Coders List Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem? On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Glen Pike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just because a guy's English ain't as good as your own is not a reason to start belittling him, especially where we can all see you. I'm not belittling him because of his english. Je suis sur qu'il pourrais me moquer a cause de mon francais debile. My real issue is that Steven, while no doubt heated, was keeping it focused on the code, while Laurent inexplicably spiralled it off into the personal with a series of totally OT attacks. Mum says, enough. Talk about code. :o And thats my last word on the subject ;) .m ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
I'm not belittling him because of his english. Je suis sur qu'il pourrais me moquer a cause de mon francais debile. My real issue is that Steven, while no doubt heated, was keeping it focused on the code, while Laurent inexplicably spiralled it off into the personal with a series of totally OT attacks. Yes, but you, and others, carried on off-topic after he had apologised, so you can't complain about him going off topic. My issue was everyone appearing having a go at Laurent by making fun of his grammar / use of English - that's how it looked. (After someone reigned him in, he apologised, but people carried on making comments) To me, this is more offensive than swearing, so if people can complain about swearing, I can complain about people taking the p*** out of someone. Even though it's off topic as this is more important in the big scheme of things than a few 0 1's getting mixed up. -- Glen Pike 01326 218440 www.glenpike.co.uk http://www.glenpike.co.uk ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
On 15/04/2008 15:35, Pete Hotchkiss wrote: People please - can we keep this thing ON TOPIC !!! Indeed. My understanding is that only SWFs loaded from the same domain are affected - those loaded from an external domain or a subdomain are protected by an implicit sandbox. So while they can't be unloaded, they are at least unaffected by the player bug and will be cleaned up by the garbage collector. Is this correct? ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Fair enough. To get back on topic: Moocks EA3 book does address this issue, but I'm wondering if he has addressed it more recently, particularly in light of the recent upswell of interest? .m On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Glen Pike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To me, this is more offensive than swearing, so if people can complain about swearing, I can complain about people taking the p*** out of someone. Even though it's off topic as this is more important in the big scheme of things than a few 0 1's getting mixed up. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
RE: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Matt S. wrote: I'm not belittling him because of his english. I don't remember anybody objecting to his English abilities. I certainly never would, because I would be quite vulnerable in my second language. On the other hand, I wouldn't have people objecting to my impolite words, because I don't know enough Chinese swear words ^_^ I'm reminded of an amusing joke (mercifully brief): Q: What do Europeans call somebody who speaks three languages? A: Trilingual Q: What do Europeans call somebody who speaks two languages? A: Bilingual Q: What do Europeans call somebody who speaks one language? A: An American. Ok, back to code. Cordially, Kerry Thompson ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
ON TOPIC: I can see that most of us feel very strongly about this bug. Adobe has made it clear that their formal channel to do something about it is to vote in their ticketing system for the bug. If there already is a bug, can someone link to it? Otherwise let's get a bug in there. And then let's vote for it. I'm pretty sure that based upon the support here we can make this the #1 bug in their database. Apologies if someone has already mentioned this. This thread is long and noisy. C ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
For the record, I never belittled his English, but rather celebrated his the internet is serious business approach, which actually had a greater affect on diffusing my frustration than anything else. :) http://blog.mediacatalyst.com/images/seriousbusiness.jpg ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
RE: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
celebrated his the internet is serious business approach It's INTERNETS, damnit! Now, can we put this derail to rest? Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ Fig Leaf Training: Adobe/Google/Paperthin Certified Partners http://training.figleaf.com/ WebManiacs 2008: the ultimate conference for CF/Flex/AIR developers! http://www.webmaniacsconference.com/ ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
I find it rather bizarre that people feel that it's necessary to beat a drum about this. I doubt that Adobe are sitting back on the issues raised. The thread has the Air of an hysterical mob. It's amazing how so many people have produced fantastic systems using Actionscript 3 in spite of the gloom and doom spouted here. From what I've read, the FP9 garbage collection is pretty much standard technology for object based systems - you can't just discard objects that have references to them. The real problem seems to be related to the other infrastructure that creates multiple object references that aren't always removable. I'm not saying bthere isn't a problem, just that it's not worthy of the histeria being generated. I understand completely it can be a serious issue for some people. Anyway, I'll express some faith that Adobe will resolve the issues - I won't be rolling back to AS2 despite the expert advice of some. I'll consign a lot of this thread to the same place as the 'end of the world is nigh' material that those people with placards dispense. No need to hand me a flaming torch just yet.. - Original Message - From: Chris Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Flash Coders List flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 6:40 PM Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem? ON TOPIC: I can see that most of us feel very strongly about this bug. Adobe has made it clear that their formal channel to do something about it is to vote in their ticketing system for the bug. If there already is a bug, can someone link to it? Otherwise let's get a bug in there. And then let's vote for it. I'm pretty sure that based upon the support here we can make this the #1 bug in their database. Apologies if someone has already mentioned this. This thread is long and noisy. C ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Does anyone know if Adobe is fixing this huge FP9 problem? http://www.gskinner.com/blog/archives/2008/04/failure_to_unlo.html Jason Merrill Bank of America GTO and Risk LLD Solutions Design Development eTools Multimedia 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 GTO Innovative Learning Blog subscribe. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Guess the best way to find out is to file a bug in the new FP bug system :-) https://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/FP - Original Message - From: Merrill, Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Flash Coders List flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 6:32 PM Subject: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem? Does anyone know if Adobe is fixing this huge FP9 problem? http://www.gskinner.com/blog/archives/2008/04/failure_to_unlo.html Jason Merrill Bank of America ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
No they are not. In fact, their absolute refusal to fix it is the reason for Grant's post. If you want it fixed, you're going to have to put pressure on Adobe, which they have certainly earned with this. Talk about it on every online forum and blog. Point to Grant's blog entry. Expose the huge memory leak in the player. Talk about how it has crippled AIR as a legitimate desktop application platform. Make major companies like Disney and Turner wary of using AS3 for their Flash sites. Think about the line about automobile recalls in Fight Club. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one. Unless this affects Adobe financially or embarrass them publicly in the tech industry, they aren't going to do anything about it. Merrill, Jason wrote: Does anyone know if Adobe is fixing this huge FP9 problem? http://www.gskinner.com/blog/archives/2008/04/failure_to_unlo.html Jason Merrill Bank of America GTO and Risk LLD Solutions Design Development eTools Multimedia 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 GTO Innovative Learning Blog subscribe. ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
And just a note here, but the blogosphere is starting to come alive with people talking about this issue. Funny that MXNA has been down for the past couple of days. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
I don't completely understand everything it's describing but I sent it on to our programming team who responded with the words wow...heinous bug. Brian Mays On 4/14/08 12:58 PM, Steven Sacks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And just a note here, but the blogosphere is starting to come alive with people talking about this issue. Funny that MXNA has been down for the past couple of days. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Indeed, its pretty bad and pretty unworkable in some circumstances as Grant has pointed out. Ick. On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 2:25 PM, Brian Mays [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't completely understand everything it's describing but I sent it on to our programming team who responded with the words wow...heinous bug. Brian Mays On 4/14/08 12:58 PM, Steven Sacks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And just a note here, but the blogosphere is starting to come alive with people talking about this issue. Funny that MXNA has been down for the past couple of days. ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Hi Steven, Where in Grant's post does he say that Adobe refuses to fix this problem? I must have missed that part. If anyone from Adobe has made such a statement, please point it out to me, because I'd have a bone to pick with that person. Grant's post is helpful because he discusses the issue in such detail, but it would be even more helpful to have a concrete test case that exhibits this problem. As Muzak suggested earlier, please take a look at the new Flash Player public bugbase. There's currently a bug titled Memory leak in AS3: https://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/FP-49 If this bug report describes the same problem that you experience, please register on the site and vote for the bug. If it doesn't describe what you are experiencing, please help us out and file a new bug report that describes your problem and upload test files if at all possible. Francis Cheng | Senior Technical Writer | Adobe Systems, Inc. http://blogs.adobe.com/fcheng -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steven Sacks Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 10:48 AM To: Flash Coders List Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem? No they are not. In fact, their absolute refusal to fix it is the reason for Grant's post. If you want it fixed, you're going to have to put pressure on Adobe, which they have certainly earned with this. Talk about it on every online forum and blog. Point to Grant's blog entry. Expose the huge memory leak in the player. Talk about how it has crippled AIR as a legitimate desktop application platform. Make major companies like Disney and Turner wary of using AS3 for their Flash sites. Think about the line about automobile recalls in Fight Club. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one. Unless this affects Adobe financially or embarrass them publicly in the tech industry, they aren't going to do anything about it. Merrill, Jason wrote: Does anyone know if Adobe is fixing this huge FP9 problem? http://www.gskinner.com/blog/archives/2008/04/failure_to_unlo.html Jason Merrill Bank of America GTO and Risk LLD Solutions Design Development eTools Multimedia 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 GTO Innovative Learning Blog subscribe. ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Francis Cheng wrote: Grant's post is helpful because he discusses the issue in such detail, but it would be even more helpful to have a concrete test case that exhibits this problem. Francis, With all due respect, the Flash team knows about this, and they don't need any more concrete test cases. We've got better things to do than play into Adobe's attempt to buy time by deflecting it back on the developers to come up with examples while the Flash team tries to get out of their blunder. It's clear that Grant had discussions with Adobe before he wrote that blog post and I'm certain that others have approached the Flash player team with this issue for awhile. Nothing has been done to fix it, so you end up with a public exposure of the issue, as Grant has done. The Flash player team has egg on its face because in AS2 if you unload a swf, it unloads, and in AS3, it doesn't. Period end of statement. The Flash GC engine's inner workings is something that nobody outside of Adobe has access into and we can't possibly make tests that demonstrate whether it is or isn't working. The proof is in the pudding and Grant's post is all the evidence you need. Let's not get into a situation where we are insulting each other's intelligence by acting like the Flash team hasn't been aware of this issue for quite some time. The Flash team is well aware of it, they know why it exists and they know it's difficult to fix. In all likelihood, they knew about it before any developer discovered it. I mean, after all, it works exactly like it was coded to work. It's not technically a bug, it's an engineering decision that is coming back to haunt them. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
RE: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
1) Are flv's affected? 2) Does it ruin Adobe media player? ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
My guess is that flv's are not affected.. And guessing some more.. external swf's that contain flv/audio are affected (e.g. audio will continue to play when unloading the swf). - Original Message - From: Barry Hannah [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Flash Coders List flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 11:06 PM Subject: RE: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem? 1) Are flv's affected? 2) Does it ruin Adobe media player? ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Correct, Muzak. They are affected. You might remember I posted about this issue last month. I cannot unload a swf that contains an embedded video on the timeline. The best I can do is stop it. Muzak wrote: My guess is that flv's are not affected.. And guessing some more.. external swf's that contain flv/audio are affected (e.g. audio will continue to play when unloading the swf). - Original Message - From: Barry Hannah [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Flash Coders List flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 11:06 PM Subject: RE: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem? 1) Are flv's affected? 2) Does it ruin Adobe media player? ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Let's get down to brass tax. Grant's post is not some bug report and everyone at Adobe knows it. Coming on here and trying to downplay it isn't going to get you very far because people are going to call bullshit. It's a major problem for Adobe for this to be made public and one reason it was made public is because the Flash team wouldn't admit it or fix it. It's not a good idea to lie to your development community. The Flash team knows what they did. They shouldn't have made this bad engineering decision and now they are in a bind because there's no going back and the best they can do is try and provide a usable workaround in the form of memory sandboxing. Weak (no pun intended). The rule for unloading a swf is that you have to remove all references, stop all timelines, stop all sounds, stop all timers, stop any enter frame listeners, etc, only then will it be allowed to unload. This requirement set up the situation where you cannot run a trace inside the swf to prove that it still exists in memory, otherwise, you've violated the requirement that allows a swf to unload. Interesting, huh? This is the very thing that the Flash team has relied upon to shield themselves from this being exposed. If you can't prove it, they don't have to fix it because they've got plausible deniability. The GC is completely hidden from developers, which only compounds the issue. Of course, this lack of transparency of the GC is by design, and that discussion is out of the scope of this conversation. This is the Flash team's dirty secret. They don't actually unload your swf. But, if you stop all timelines, scripts, and clear all references then to the casual observer it appears that your clip is unloaded because you have no solid way of proving otherwsie. Crafty, but not crafty enough. Unfortunately for the Flash player team, some smart developers figured out a way to prove what's really going on, and because of their continued denials and refusal to fix it because of the difficulty in doing so, their dirty little secret has been exposed. The fact of the matter is, if your references are within the scope of the swf, and you unload the swf, then the swf and everything inside it should unload. You shouldn't have to turn off anything inside a swf if its scope stays within the swf. You shouldn't have to call stop() on all timelines inside a swf that you're trying to unload, either. AS2 let you do it, so should AS3. I don't know how Adobe, in good conscience, could be pushing newbie developers to learn AS3. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
RE: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Steven, Steven Sacks wrote: We've got better things to do than play into Adobe's attempt to buy time by deflecting it back on the developers ... I'm not trying to deflect anything or to buy time. I was just making a statement that it's more helpful to have concrete test cases. You said yourself that it's difficult to fix, so it seems reasonable to me that having more concrete test cases will make it easier to fix. It's clear that Grant had discussions with Adobe before he wrote that blog post and I'm certain that others have approached the Flash player team with this issue for awhile. You seem to be implying that Grant wrote the blog post only after he was rebuffed or stonewalled by the Flash Player team when he approached them with this issue. I have no idea whether he has contacted the Flash Player team about this issue, but he certainly doesn't explicitly talk about it in his post. In fact, what he does say about the Flash Player team seems to cut the other way: The player team is a group of smart, dedicated people, who are genuinely interested in what you have to say. I'd like to humbly offer a possible alternative motive for Grant's post. Perhaps he understands that the Player team gets a lot of feedback and has to evaluate each issue based not only on its severity, but also on the amount of content and the number of developers that the issue affects. Perhaps his post was an attempt to clarify to the Flash Player team that they have underestimated both the severity and scope of this issue. The Flash GC engine's inner workings is something that nobody outside of Adobe has access into... Not true. The Flash GC engine used in AVM2 is open-source (as part of the Tamarin project). I'm just mentioning this as a point of interest. I'm not in any way deflecting the issue here. I don't expect anyone on this list to actually fix Tamarin GC bugs or to understand the inner workings of the GC before filing a bug report. But if you are curious about the AVM2 garbage collector, named MMgc, here's a link to the Tamarin GC docs: http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/MMgc Let's not get into a situation where we are insulting each other's intelligence by acting like the Flash team hasn't been aware of this issue for quite some time. I never said the player team hasn't heard about this. In fact, the bug report I linked to in my last message was filed in late November 2007. Another side note--someone mentioned Grant's blog post on Flexcoders last week, and Alex Harui, who is an order of magnitude smarter than I am, responded: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/message/109455 Francis Cheng | Senior Technical Writer | Adobe Systems, Inc. http://blogs.adobe.com/fcheng -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steven Sacks Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 12:45 PM To: Flash Coders List Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem? Francis Cheng wrote: Grant's post is helpful because he discusses the issue in such detail, but it would be even more helpful to have a concrete test case that exhibits this problem. Francis, With all due respect, the Flash team knows about this, and they don't need any more concrete test cases. We've got better things to do than play into Adobe's attempt to buy time by deflecting it back on the developers to come up with examples while the Flash team tries to get out of their blunder. It's clear that Grant had discussions with Adobe before he wrote that blog post and I'm certain that others have approached the Flash player team with this issue for awhile. Nothing has been done to fix it, so you end up with a public exposure of the issue, as Grant has done. The Flash player team has egg on its face because in AS2 if you unload a swf, it unloads, and in AS3, it doesn't. Period end of statement. The Flash GC engine's inner workings is something that nobody outside of Adobe has access into and we can't possibly make tests that demonstrate whether it is or isn't working. The proof is in the pudding and Grant's post is all the evidence you need. Let's not get into a situation where we are insulting each other's intelligence by acting like the Flash team hasn't been aware of this issue for quite some time. The Flash team is well aware of it, they know why it exists and they know it's difficult to fix. In all likelihood, they knew about it before any developer discovered it. I mean, after all, it works exactly like it was coded to work. It's not technically a bug, it's an engineering decision that is coming back to haunt them. ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
You could write them an email saying you will do that if they don't fix this huge issue ending your mail with such an smiley ;) Instead of being a huge sucker. I hope, Steven, this is just part of the strategy. How much money have you make since flash player is out...? 300 000$ a year you saidhm FP team really sucks...wooo hell... As if this issue was the end of the worldwhat the fuck is a flash player in the universe god damn it! By the way, Disney just called me, they don't give a shit... L Steven Sacks a écrit : No they are not. In fact, their absolute refusal to fix it is the reason for Grant's post. If you want it fixed, you're going to have to put pressure on Adobe, which they have certainly earned with this. Talk about it on every online forum and blog. Point to Grant's blog entry. Expose the huge memory leak in the player. Talk about how it has crippled AIR as a legitimate desktop application platform. Make major companies like Disney and Turner wary of using AS3 for their Flash sites. Think about the line about automobile recalls in Fight Club. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one. Unless this affects Adobe financially or embarrass them publicly in the tech industry, they aren't going to do anything about it. Merrill, Jason wrote: Does anyone know if Adobe is fixing this huge FP9 problem? http://www.gskinner.com/blog/archives/2008/04/failure_to_unlo.html Jason Merrill Bank of America GTO and Risk LLD Solutions Design Development eTools Multimedia 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 GTO Innovative Learning Blog subscribe. ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Thanks for the link to Alex Harui's post, Francis. It unquestionably supports my stance that only advanced developers should be using AS3 and everyone else (95% of Flash developers) should stick with AS1/AS2. This issue of not unloading swfs unless you explicitly turn everything off inside it is another prime reason why only expert developers should be coding AS3. The fact that it doesn't actually work even when you do requires a high level of programming skill to manage correctly. This is not the realm of designers, animators and low to mid level Flash developers. Nobody wants to acknowledge the strictness in AS3 is not merely syntax, but extends to the entire way you develop. Most Flash developers out there are not strict or disciplined programmers. AS2's looseness (and the ability to unload swfs) is still best for creative Flash development except in the trained hands of Flash experts who know how to manage the memory management issues. If the GC implementation in Flash was truly transparent, then somebody would be able to explain why Grant's localConnection hack to force the GC to run worked. The Flash team would also provide some API methods into it. There is no API to the GC, therefore it's implementation is not transparent. And to the guy who said Disney doesn't give a shit, you're wrong. Disney is undergoing a major overhaul of all their Flash content to AS3. They've been in touch with Adobe about this. Let's not spread misinformation here. I think Adobe has done enough. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Also I want to make clear that I am not putting any words into Grant's mouth. I have not had any discussion with Grant personally on this topic. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Ha! I never said I make $300,000 a year. Where did you get such a crazy idea as that? :) The Flash player team knew they were in a pickle and instead of providing a way to punt something or forcibly shut it down, they opted to not say anything and hope that nobody figured it out. That might be ok when you only have a few hundred users, but with the way Adobe's been pushing AS3 at everyone, getting people like Colin Moock to try and convert newbie developers to use AS3 claiming how much better it is, Adobe's behavior is completely irresponsible. I make my living with Flash. I don't need other companies out there pushing competing technologies to be able to point out that the Flash player has a major issue in it so come to the darkside. Adobe needs to fix it, pronto. :)-- Smiley face laurent wrote: I hope, Steven, this is just part of the strategy. How much money have you make since flash player is out...? 300 000$ a year you said ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Steven Sacks a écrit : Thanks for the link to Alex Harui's post, Francis. It unquestionably supports my stance that only advanced developers should be using AS3 and everyone else (95% of Flash developers) should stick with AS1/AS2. Bullshit This issue of not unloading swfs unless you explicitly turn everything off inside it is another prime reason why only expert developers should be coding AS3. Bullcrap The fact that it doesn't actually work even when you do requires a high level of programming skill to manage correctly. This is not the realm of designers, animators and low to mid level Flash developers. Who are you for god sake ? I know who you are it's just to mean it means nothing. Nobody wants to acknowledge the strictness in AS3 is not merely syntax, but extends to the entire way you develop. Most Flash developers out there are not strict or disciplined programmers. Nice. sources ? I don't ask for your clean code here. AS2's looseness (and the ability to unload swfs) is still best for creative Flash development except in the trained hands of Flash experts who know how to manage the memory management issues. yeah we know creatives are just a bunch of troubadour...nearly monkeys, give them bananas and they'll have fun. If the GC implementation in Flash was truly transparent, then somebody would be able to explain why Grant's localConnection hack to force the GC to run worked. The Flash team would also provide some API methods into it. There is no API to the GC, therefore it's implementation is not transparent. True they must be something hidden by the team, something nasty, their own shit I think. Remember shit is the essence of the world everything grows out of shit. And to the guy who said Disney doesn't give a shit, you're wrong. Disney is undergoing a major overhaul of all their Flash content to AS3. They've been in touch with Adobe about this. Let's not spread misinformation here. I think Adobe has done enough. You can't even read you mail box...I don't know who's misinforming people here, where do you glance your informations, from true moment of inspiration or you work for the aliens...? Laurent Quoting Dsiney, Hey man you know how much money we make in our parks, on exploiting poor students, comedians, other unknown artists make them play Dingo or Donal Duck ;) What is memory used for in a computer ? Memory is dangerous man. ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
- Original Message - From: Steven Sacks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Flash Coders List flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 11:51 PM Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem? I don't need other companies out there pushing competing technologies to be able to point out that the Flash player has a major issue in it so come to the darkside. You're saving them the job. If I were reading this thread I'd wonder how anyone had ever done anything with Flash. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Laurent, you're my hero! teh internet is serious business INDEED! :) ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Ha! Paul Andrews wrote: You're saving them the job. If I were reading this thread I'd wonder how anyone had ever done anything with Flash. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
RE: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Can you please refrain from your personal tirade on this list? I'm sick of your potty mouth, it's completely unprofessional and unnecessary. If you have an axe to grind with Steven, email him directly. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of laurent Sent: Tuesday, 15 April 2008 10:57 a.m. To: Flash Coders List Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem? Steven Sacks a écrit : Thanks for the link to Alex Harui's post, Francis. It unquestionably supports my stance that only advanced developers should be using AS3 and everyone else (95% of Flash developers) should stick with AS1/AS2. Bullshit This issue of not unloading swfs unless you explicitly turn everything off inside it is another prime reason why only expert developers should be coding AS3. Bullcrap The fact that it doesn't actually work even when you do requires a high level of programming skill to manage correctly. This is not the realm of designers, animators and low to mid level Flash developers. Who are you for god sake ? I know who you are it's just to mean it means nothing. Nobody wants to acknowledge the strictness in AS3 is not merely syntax, but extends to the entire way you develop. Most Flash developers out there are not strict or disciplined programmers. Nice. sources ? I don't ask for your clean code here. AS2's looseness (and the ability to unload swfs) is still best for creative Flash development except in the trained hands of Flash experts who know how to manage the memory management issues. yeah we know creatives are just a bunch of troubadour...nearly monkeys, give them bananas and they'll have fun. If the GC implementation in Flash was truly transparent, then somebody would be able to explain why Grant's localConnection hack to force the GC to run worked. The Flash team would also provide some API methods into it. There is no API to the GC, therefore it's implementation is not transparent. True they must be something hidden by the team, something nasty, their own shit I think. Remember shit is the essence of the world everything grows out of shit. And to the guy who said Disney doesn't give a shit, you're wrong. Disney is undergoing a major overhaul of all their Flash content to AS3. They've been in touch with Adobe about this. Let's not spread misinformation here. I think Adobe has done enough. You can't even read you mail box...I don't know who's misinforming people here, where do you glance your informations, from true moment of inspiration or you work for the aliens...? Laurent Quoting Dsiney, Hey man you know how much money we make in our parks, on exploiting poor students, comedians, other unknown artists make them play Dingo or Donal Duck ;) What is memory used for in a computer ? Memory is dangerous man. ___ 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 Scanned by Bizo Email Filter ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Yeah I'm sorry Steven, I don't have real technical arguments on all this and of course you're making a point that perhaps - because no one can prove it, even not the aliens, I'm working for them they have no clue, and I know you don't that was just to see how far you can go - perhaps adobe tried to hide a mistake ( and that's just fantasy), and who does not when managing his life, and how big is the mistake or how big are you making it, seriously Grant post is fare, and fare with the great adobe team. What best move to go as maximum open source as they can,it's a big montain to move, so it must involve great movement somewhere. Those are to care about. . To be serious, you posted this at 18:38 (Berlin time) the 26/03/08: You're joking, right? Talented Flash developers are in extremely high demand right now. Every day I get 3-5 emails from recruiters or companies. It's a seller's market and people are paying top dollar for AS3 and Flex devs. Flash and Flex jobs are paying $75-$150/hr. That's $150,000 - $300,000 a year. If you can't afford a Porsche, you need to find a new job or grow a pair and ask for a raise. That being said, I don't own a Porsche because I've got better things to do with my money. ;) Sorry I'm arguing in a really subjective nasty way here, but I get pist off sometimes and concerned Nice words: I did learn very fast a lot about structuring my project in installing your Gaia framework. You must be a great programmer, so come back to us, Gaia Loves you (if you don't spit on it :) L Steven Sacks a écrit : Laurent, you're my hero! teh internet is serious business INDEED! :) ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
I'm so confused... You bummed that you don't make that much, or: ticked that he wants to force action on this bug, or: hate the color of his shirt, or On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 4:44 PM, laurent [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah I'm sorry Steven, I don't have real technical arguments on all this and of course you're making a point that perhaps - because no one can prove it, even not the aliens, I'm working for them they have no clue, and I know you don't that was just to see how far you can go - perhaps adobe tried to hide a mistake ( and that's just fantasy), and who does not when managing his life, and how big is the mistake or how big are you making it, seriously Grant post is fare, and fare with the great adobe team. What best move to go as maximum open source as they can,it's a big montain to move, so it must involve great movement somewhere. Those are to care about. . To be serious, you posted this at 18:38 (Berlin time) the 26/03/08: You're joking, right? Talented Flash developers are in extremely high demand right now. Every day I get 3-5 emails from recruiters or companies. It's a seller's market and people are paying top dollar for AS3 and Flex devs. Flash and Flex jobs are paying $75-$150/hr. That's $150,000 - $300,000 a year. If you can't afford a Porsche, you need to find a new job or grow a pair and ask for a raise. That being said, I don't own a Porsche because I've got better things to do with my money. ;) Sorry I'm arguing in a really subjective nasty way here, but I get pist off sometimes and concerned Nice words: I did learn very fast a lot about structuring my project in installing your Gaia framework. You must be a great programmer, so come back to us, Gaia Loves you (if you don't spit on it :) L Steven Sacks a écrit : Laurent, you're my hero! teh internet is serious business INDEED! :) ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Steven Sacks wrote: And to the guy who said Disney doesn't give a shit, you're wrong. Disney is undergoing a major overhaul of all their Flash content to AS3. They've been in touch with Adobe about this. Let's not spread misinformation here. I think Adobe has done enough. Toyota is migrating/has migrated to AS3 too (and their coding standards are kinda sexy). This issue may actually impact a project I was discussing with a client today. The client wants to do an RIA with AIR and it will require the loading/unloading of content. The nature of the content requires a lot of memory so, if this issue is as pervasive as has been described, AIR won't be an option. Hmmm, the tests they have done so far were built Flex. Now I have to see if this will present a problem overall. :sigh: -Ricky ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
RE: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
I am absolutely amazed at the liberty that you have taken in passing off your assumptions and opinions as fact. It unquestionably supports my stance that only advanced developers should be using AS3 and everyone else (95% of Flash developers) should stick with AS1/AS2. Can you prove this with hard statistics? The fact that it doesn't actually work even when you do requires a high level of programming skill to manage correctly. You even used the word 'fact' this time. Most Flash developers out there are not strict or disciplined programmers. Once again, this is nothing more than opinion. Let's not spread misinformation here. I think Adobe has done enough. The sheer irony of this statement is astounding. Steve, your conspiracy theories and posturing is doing nothing to cement professional opinions of your abilities and character. Your intellect is entirely eclipsed by the collective intelligence of the flash player team and only a fool would suggest they are not doing anything to fix it. There are things you can do besides bickering and making accusations that will actually HELP the problem. Write an article, explore alternate solutions, submit a wish list, etc. Be constructive not destructive. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steven Sacks Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 3:28 PM To: Flash Coders List Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem? Thanks for the link to Alex Harui's post, Francis. It unquestionably supports my stance that only advanced developers should be using AS3 and everyone else (95% of Flash developers) should stick with AS1/AS2. This issue of not unloading swfs unless you explicitly turn everything off inside it is another prime reason why only expert developers should be coding AS3. The fact that it doesn't actually work even when you do requires a high level of programming skill to manage correctly. This is not the realm of designers, animators and low to mid level Flash developers. Nobody wants to acknowledge the strictness in AS3 is not merely syntax, but extends to the entire way you develop. Most Flash developers out there are not strict or disciplined programmers. AS2's looseness (and the ability to unload swfs) is still best for creative Flash development except in the trained hands of Flash experts who know how to manage the memory management issues. If the GC implementation in Flash was truly transparent, then somebody would be able to explain why Grant's localConnection hack to force the GC to run worked. The Flash team would also provide some API methods into it. There is no API to the GC, therefore it's implementation is not transparent. And to the guy who said Disney doesn't give a shit, you're wrong. Disney is undergoing a major overhaul of all their Flash content to AS3. They've been in touch with Adobe about this. Let's not spread misinformation here. I think Adobe has done enough. ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Certainly not the first one, perhaps a mix of the two last you wrote. There's way of doing things. And way to say as if as a professionnal way totally unprofessionnal things. L Bob Wohl a écrit : I'm so confused... You bummed that you don't make that much, or: ticked that he wants to force action on this bug, or: hate the color of his shirt, or On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 4:44 PM, laurent [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah I'm sorry Steven, I don't have real technical arguments on all this and of course you're making a point that perhaps - because no one can prove it, even not the aliens, I'm working for them they have no clue, and I know you don't that was just to see how far you can go - perhaps adobe tried to hide a mistake ( and that's just fantasy), and who does not when managing his life, and how big is the mistake or how big are you making it, seriously Grant post is fare, and fare with the great adobe team. What best move to go as maximum open source as they can,it's a big montain to move, so it must involve great movement somewhere. Those are to care about. . To be serious, you posted this at 18:38 (Berlin time) the 26/03/08: You're joking, right? Talented Flash developers are in extremely high demand right now. Every day I get 3-5 emails from recruiters or companies. It's a seller's market and people are paying top dollar for AS3 and Flex devs. Flash and Flex jobs are paying $75-$150/hr. That's $150,000 - $300,000 a year. If you can't afford a Porsche, you need to find a new job or grow a pair and ask for a raise. That being said, I don't own a Porsche because I've got better things to do with my money. ;) Sorry I'm arguing in a really subjective nasty way here, but I get pist off sometimes and concerned Nice words: I did learn very fast a lot about structuring my project in installing your Gaia framework. You must be a great programmer, so come back to us, Gaia Loves you (if you don't spit on it :) L Steven Sacks a écrit : Laurent, you're my hero! teh internet is serious business INDEED! :) ___ 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 ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
ah, clarity! On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 5:13 PM, laurent [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Certainly not the first one, perhaps a mix of the two last you wrote. There's way of doing things. And way to say as if as a professionnal way totally unprofessionnal things. L Bob Wohl a écrit : I'm so confused... You bummed that you don't make that much, or: ticked that he wants to force action on this bug, or: hate the color of his shirt, or On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 4:44 PM, laurent [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah I'm sorry Steven, I don't have real technical arguments on all this and of course you're making a point that perhaps - because no one can prove it, even not the aliens, I'm working for them they have no clue, and I know you don't that was just to see how far you can go - perhaps adobe tried to hide a mistake ( and that's just fantasy), and who does not when managing his life, and how big is the mistake or how big are you making it, seriously Grant post is fare, and fare with the great adobe team. What best move to go as maximum open source as they can,it's a big montain to move, so it must involve great movement somewhere. Those are to care about. . To be serious, you posted this at 18:38 (Berlin time) the 26/03/08: You're joking, right? Talented Flash developers are in extremely high demand right now. Every day I get 3-5 emails from recruiters or companies. It's a seller's market and people are paying top dollar for AS3 and Flex devs. Flash and Flex jobs are paying $75-$150/hr. That's $150,000 - $300,000 a year. If you can't afford a Porsche, you need to find a new job or grow a pair and ask for a raise. That being said, I don't own a Porsche because I've got better things to do with my money. ;) Sorry I'm arguing in a really subjective nasty way here, but I get pist off sometimes and concerned Nice words: I did learn very fast a lot about structuring my project in installing your Gaia framework. You must be a great programmer, so come back to us, Gaia Loves you (if you don't spit on it :) L Steven Sacks a écrit : Laurent, you're my hero! teh internet is serious business INDEED! :) ___ 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 ___ 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] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Laurent wrote: what the f**k is a flash player in the universe god damn it! By the way, Disney just called me, they don't give a s**t... Ouch. Ok, I'm old-fashioned, but, please, Laurent, out of consideration for the more prudish members of the list like myself, could you refrain from that sort of language? I'm not the list mom, and don't pretend to speak for anybody but myself, but that does make me uncomfortable. Please? Cordially, Kerry Thompson ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Re: [Flashcoders] Is Adobe fixing this big FP9 problem?
Laurent wrote: what the f**k is a flash player in the universe god damn it! By the way, Disney just called me, they don't give a s**t... Kerry Thompson wrote: Ouch. Ok, I'm old-fashioned, but, please, Laurent, out of consideration for the more prudish members of the list like myself, could you refrain from that sort of language? I'm not the list mom, and don't pretend to speak for anybody but myself, but that does make me uncomfortable. Yeah, Jason Merrill works in corporate America and he has to be careful, too. Put $10 in the swear jar. ___ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
