I've been suprised how far I've gotten (in what is a pretty complex app) without major problems.  Generator have almost a major app in 2004 without major holdups.  The only issues I've found so far (not neccesarily 2004) are:
 
1 - In an Actionscript 2.0 class what you think is a per-instance array variable turns out to be static if you initialise it outside a function.

A.as:

Class A {

    var myArray:Array = [];

    function addEntry() {

        myArray.push("hello");

        trace(myArray.length);

    }

}

 

B.as:

class B {

    var myArray:Array;

    function B() {

        myArray = [];

    }

    function addEntry() {

        myArray.push("hello");

        trace(myArray.length);

    }

}

 

In your movie:

var a1:A = new A();

var a2:A = new A();

var b1:B = new B();

var b2:B = new B();

a1.addEntry();

a2.addEntry();

b1.addEntry();

b2.addEntry();

This produces output:

1

2

1

1

 

B works as expected, but the array in A turns out to be static.

2 - I'm creating a listener object for a MovieClipLoader. In one of the handler functions I need to refer to various properties and methods of the original object:

function MapLayerModel(...) {

    ...

    mcl = new MovieClipLoader();

    var mclListener = {mlm:this};

    mclListener. {

        ...various (previously ok, now illegal) references to mlm

    }

    mclListener. (target_mc, errorCode) {

        ...

    }

    mcl.addListener(mclListener);

    ...

} // function MapLayerModel

 

Following the usual practice I add a property for the listener's methods to use that refers back to the original object... But the syntax checker chokes with multiple errors to the effect:

"There is no property with the name 'mlm'."

Now, I can work around this by declaring my listener in a separate file but that's pretty inconvenient for something that is a very common task in Actionscript.

3 See yesterday's post about memory usage.

Cheers,

Robin

 
"Knott, Brian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Robin,
> How if Flash MX 2004 going.  I have noticed people on the list that
> say its buggy and have gone back to MX.  Are there any updates on the way.
>
> Brian
---
You are currently subscribed to fugli as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

MX Downunder AsiaPac DevCon - http://mxdu.com/

Reply via email to