On 27/07/2010 20:34, Taka Kojima wrote:
and you can also do...
function onSomeEvent(e:Event = null):void{
}
and then just call the function directly, without creating a new Event
instance. i.e.:
onSomeEvent();
Yes, but I specifically avoid that - I like to separate event handlers
and other functionality. It's a choice, not a necessity.
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Paul Andrews<p...@ipauland.com> wrote:
On 27/07/2010 19:37, Henrik Andersson wrote:
Paul Andrews wrote:
If you try and call a function designed to be an event handler directly,
you must create an event object instance to correspond with the event
argument yourself when it is called.
You must at the very least give the parameter a value. A null reference
counts as a value. You can either make it optional or simply pass null each
time you are calling it yourself. If it is valid depends on what the
function does with it.
Well it will work, though I think it's not the best practice.
If I have an event handler that does "taskX", and I want to do taskX
directly without an event, I would code this as
function onSomeEvent(e:Event):void {
taskX();
}
and have a separate taskX() function to allow that to be called directly.
Then there's no ambiguity over whether a function is an event handler or
not. Generally speaking calling event handlers directly is to be avoided.
Paul
_______________________________________________
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
