You mean that even with that code :

        var loadDirection:Timer = new Timer
(delay_ini,str_lieux.length-1);

        loadDirection.addEventListener(TimerEvent.TIMER,
onloadDirectionTimer);
        loadDirection.addEventListener(TimerEvent.TIMER_COMPLETE,
doneloadDirectionTimer);
        loadDirection.start();

        //EACH TIMER CALL
        function onloadDirectionTimer(event:TimerEvent):void
        {

                //Stop the timer to have 1 request at a time
                loadDirection.stop();

                //Define the path
                path = str_lieux[i] + " to " + str_lieux[i+1];
                //Calculate the direction
                var dir:Directions = new Directions();
                dir.addEventListener(DirectionsEvent.DIRECTIONS_SUCCESS,
onDirLoadInitial);
                dir.addEventListener(DirectionsEvent.DIRECTIONS_FAILURE, 
onDirFail);
                trace(path);
                dir.load(path);

        }

As soon as the function called by the timer onloadDirectionTimer the
timer is stopped.
Say that the first call is A, then in A the timer is stopped. However,
what you're explaining is that the process to call A and to stop the
timer might be longer than another call B by the timer to the function
onloadDirectionTimer ?
What would you use instead of a Timer ?
Thank you

On Aug 14, 1:06 pm, Nianwei <[email protected]> wrote:
> Not necessarily.
> Your timer may already kicked off multiple requests before it ever get
> a chance to stop because the stop code is only executed after the
> first response.
> Timer is something that should be very careful in Async programming
> environment cause it can really mess things up and hard to debug.
>
> Of course you should find out first it is true the direction server
> does not like multiple concurrent requests. If it does not, you should
> avoid timer, if it's OK with it, you may need to look into using
> closure to make sure you are handling the response of your actual
> request to make sure your program runs correctly even it is a
> different issue to the error you get.
>
>
>
> > Therefore, I think this way of doing things prevents the
> > undeterministic approach, don't you think so ?
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Maps API For Flash" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-maps-api-for-flash?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to