Thank you for your replying)
How I'll know what delay I need to put into the postDelayed?
It can be different on real device, or user can run too many apps and
my will be running slowly, so getView will be calling too long.
On 28 апр, 18:57, Streets Of Boston <flyingdutc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yikes....
>
> Another option would be to start a timer at each getView call (using
> postDelayed and removeCallbacks methods; postDelayd to start timer,
> removeCallbacks to remove previous timer until the last call to
> getView).
>
> When the last timer times-out (the last non-remove postDelayed), the
> task (Runnable provided to the postDelayed call) could get the
> GridView and loop over its child-views (which are the cells). This
> means you will start the animations 'outside' of the getView method,
> after the grid-view has finished all its work.
>
> Maybe there is a better way than using a timer to figure out when a
> listview or gridview are done laying out their child-views, though....
>
> On Apr 28, 11:40 am, Illidane <illid...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I have tried to do that - doesn't working for me :(
> > Animation is running always without last cell.
> > I think so:
> > In first case there is a '0' at the end of position values. Without
> > your algorithm all 100 animations is running, than without last ( and
> > there is no '0' at the end ).
> > With you alhorithm animation will start before position will be a '0'
> > for the third time, because _visited[0] will be true;
> > I think there is some regularity here.
>
> > And one more thing... I would like to start animations in some other
> > function. Than it's working fine. For example in onCreate method in
> > the my grid click listener: after mGameGrid.setAdapter(mAdapter). But
> > I need to set timer in 200, or 500 ms for waiting for getView finish
> > its work ( but even so, it's not always make it in time and I see only
> > half or 2/3 of all animations running). If I call start animation
> > after setAdapter without timer - it's doesn't work. Why animation is
> > working fine in that case, but don't working if I run it in getView
> > method, even with your algorithm?
>
> > On 28 апр, 16:55, Streets Of Boston <flyingdutc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Don't rely on the order in which getView is called. It is not a bug.
> > > It is a decision of the design of the grid/list view not to be
> > > dependent on the order in which getView is called. Why getView with
> > > position '0' is called three times... i don't know. *If* this is a
> > > bug, it is only a peformance issue. Maybe it has to do with lay-out
> > > issues (layout 'weights' are used)? Just don't rely on the order.
>
> > > However, maybe you can do this instead. Below is code that does not
> > > rely on the number of times getView is called nor the order in which
> > > it is called:
>
> > > You know that you have 100 cells. Make an array of 100 booleans as an
> > > instance variable of your adapter or activity (e.g. boolean[] _visited
> > > = new boolean[100]). Initially, set every element in this array to
> > > false. When getView is called with a value of position, do this inside
> > > of your getView method:
>
> > > ...
> > > ...
> > > _visited[position] = true;
> > > boolean allCellsAreShown = true;
> > > for (int i = 0; i < _visited.length; i++) {
> > > if (!_visited[i]) {
> > > allCellsAreShown = false;
> > > break;
> > > }
> > > }
> > > if (allCellsAreShown) {
> > > ... // start your animation.
> > > }
> > > ...
> > > ...
>
> > > (you could optimize the above code a bit... but i think you'd get the
> > > idea :=) ).
>
> > > On Apr 28, 9:43 am, "yarik...@gmail.com" <yarik...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > I have exactly same problem. Why do we have 102 values of position
> > > > when there is only 100 cells displayed on screen?
> > > > "position is changed like: 0, 0, 1, 2, 3... 99, 0" - what is the cause
> > > > of that? Can someone from google team answer?
> > > > That seems to be a bug, very annoying bug. Answer "It's not a bug" is
> > > > not answer! How do you generate position?
>
> > > > On Apr 27, 9:40 pm, Illidane <illid...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > There is a way to make GridView without Adapter ( e.g. something
> > > > > like .addView() method ) ?
>
> > > > > On 27 апр, 21:38, Illidane <illid...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > My GridView shows all 100 cells on the screen ( all visible at one
> > > > > > moment )
> > > > > > and all the animation works fine, and pretty fast ( on all 100
> > > > > > elements ),
> > > > > > but than begin problems with last cell.
> > > > > > Animation not child-view's. Each cell is a imageView with animation
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > it.
>
> > > > > > On 27 апр, 20:43, Streets Of Boston <flyingdutc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > It's not buggy. I use the adapters and grid/list-views in my apps
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > they work fine. I think they are not designed for your purpose.
>
> > > > > > > e.g. If your adapter has 100 elements and the grid/list-view only
> > > > > > > shows about 15 at a time on the screen, the getView is called
> > > > > > > about 15
> > > > > > > times. Sometimes more times, depending whether a little bit (a few
> > > > > > > pixels) of the top or bottom child-view become visible or not.
> > > > > > > Then,
> > > > > > > when you start scrolling, getView gets called again and again when
> > > > > > > child-views become visible and others become invisible.
>
> > > > > > > Also, seriously consider re-using the convertView for your grid-
> > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > list-view. My experience is that it can really slow down your app
> > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > you just return new View instances for each child-view/cell:
> > > > > > > public ... getView(....) {
> > > > > > > View view = convertView != null ? convertView :
> > > > > > > createNewView(...);
> > > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > return view;
>
> > > > > > > }
>
> > > > > > > The implementation of the adapter+listviews does not need to rely
> > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > the order in which the getView is called. As long as it is called
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > every child-view that becomes visible.
>
> > > > > > > Isn't is possible to start a child-view's (cell's) animation when
> > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > handle it the getView(...) method?
>
> > > > > > > If you really want at least 100 child-views/cells to be created (i
> > > > > > > won't recommend it... it's a LOT), you can override the Adapter's
> > > > > > > getViewTypeCount() and getItemViewType(int pos). Even with this,
> > > > > > > I'm
> > > > > > > still not sure if getView would get called in the order you want.
>
> > > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > private static int EXPECTED_CELL_COUNT = 100;
>
> > > > > > > public int getViewTypeCount() { return EXPECTED_CELL_COUNT; }
> > > > > > > public int getItemViewType(int pos) { return pos %
> > > > > > > EXPECTED_CELL_COUNT; }
>
> > > > > > > On Apr 27, 1:07 pm, Illidane <illid...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > And you think it's not a bug? where is guarantee that it will
> > > > > > > > work in
> > > > > > > > general?
> > > > > > > > Where adapter takes it's magic number N?
>
> > > > > > > > On 27 апр, 19:56, Romain Guy <romain...@google.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > There is no guarantee it's going to be called N times either.
>
> > > > > > > > > 2009/4/27 Illidane <illid...@gmail.com>:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Even with convertView problem is still same - last cell is
> > > > > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > > animating.
> > > > > > > > > > And... you said WHEN getView()... I think it's no matter,
> > > > > > > > > > matter HOW
> > > > > > > > > > MANY times getView() called.
> > > > > > > > > > It calls more than 100 times, whats very strange.
> > > > > > > > > > For the first time it's called 102 times and all animations
> > > > > > > > > > was
> > > > > > > > > > working. For the second and next times it was 101, and last
> > > > > > > > > > animation
> > > > > > > > > > was static.
> > > > > > > > > > I think where is some bug regularity...
>
> > > > > > > > > > On 27 апр, 19:31, Romain Guy <romain...@google.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >> You should ALWAYS reuse the convertView, oherwise you're
> > > > > > > > > >> gonna eat up
> > > > > > > > > >> memory and just slow down your app. And like I said, there
> > > > > > > > > >> is no
> > > > > > > > > >> guarantee on how and when getView() is called so you
> > > > > > > > > >> cannot rely on it
> > > > > > > > > >> with your anim counter.
>
> > > > > > > > > >> 2009/4/27 Illidane <illid...@gmail.com>:
>
> > > > > > > > > >> > I dont use convertView parametr and return new
> > > > > > > > > >> > child-view.
>
> > > > > > > > > >> > Each cell has an animation. In the getView I generate an
> > > > > > > > > >> > array of
> > > > > > > > > >> > animations, wich I start when the adapter stops his work
> > > > > > > > > >> > ( e.g. when
> > > > > > > > > >> > my mAnimCounter == 102 ( but need be max 100, lol ) When
> > > > > > > > > >> > I run app,
> > > > > > > > > >> > all 100 cells are animated. But when I re-check the
> > > > > > > > > >> > field as I need
> > > > > > > > > >> > and call mGameGrid.setAdapter(mAdapter), new animations
> > > > > > > > > >> > working, but
> > > > > > > > > >> > last. Last cell are NOT animated. Problem can be only in
> > > > > > > > > >> > getView and
> > > > > > > > > >> > method how it works. I very doubt that it's not a bug of
> > > > > > > > > >> > GridView or
> > > > > > > > > >> > Adapter.
>
> > > > > > > > > >> > On 27 апр, 18:59, Streets Of Boston
> > > > > > > > > >> > <flyingdutc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >> >> The child/item-views in list-views and grid-views are
> > > > > > > > > >> >> re-used
> > > > > > > > > >> >> (convertView input parameter). I suspect that depending
> > > > > > > > > >> >> on the layout/
> > > > > > > > > >> >> measurements/visibility of the child-views and the way
> > > > > > > > > >> >> you implement
> > > > > > > > > >> >> getView (re-using convertView or ignoring it and
> > > > > > > > > >> >> returning a brand-new
> > > > > > > > > >> >> child-view every time), the order in which these
> > > > > > > > > >> >> child-views are
> > > > > > > > > >> >> called (value of 'position' parameter in the getView
> > > > > > > > > >> >> method) can be
> > > > > > > > > >> >> random.
>
> > > > > > > > > >> >> On Apr 27, 11:30 am, Illidane <illid...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > >> >> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > >> >> > Why number of getView calls is different??
> > > > > > > > > >> >> > One time it's 102 ( but need to be 100 ) and the
> > > > > > > > > >> >> > second and greater is
> > > > > > > > > >> >> > 101.
>
> > > > > > > > > >> >> > On 27 апр, 18:15, Romain Guy <romain...@google.com>
> > > > > > > > > >> >> > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > It's not a bug. There's no guarantee in the order
> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > of the calls wrt to
> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > the position value. It also depends on how the
> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > GridView is
>
> ...
>
> продолжение >>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Android Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
android-developers-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
