Better Design?

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hi guys,
I use your Tweener script with much pleasure. The simplicity is key. 
But the design could be just a little better. 

By making a Transitions class that holds all the type of transitions in
constants, you prevent typo's. 

I would really like it if it would use the normal event system of as3.0. So
that I can add event listeners, like I always do. 

Maybe it is an option to make a TweenerData class. Instead of giving the
addTween method just an object you pass it an TweenerData instance. 
This instance you build earlier, and you just change the properties. This
also prevents typo's. 

I am curious what you guys opinion is about this. 

Greetings, Peter

Original issue reported on code.google.com by theFlash...@gmail.com on 21 Sep 2007 at 8:57

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Peter, for discussions, please post it on the mailing list.

Transitions: there is a transition class. It's the Equations one. Using the
transition as a string is optional and just a shortcut. You can use any 
function as a
parameter, including custom transitions.

We're looking into using event parameters like AS3.

Having a fixed, non-dynamic object for the tweening would prevent one from 
adding
properties one want to change to it. It would need one object for the tweening
parameters, and one object for the properties to be changed. It makes sense but 
the
additional abstraction and structure would simply transform it into a different
solution altogether. having type checking is important but remember Tweener was 
made
with simplicity in mind in a way that all you need for a tweening is one 
straight
forward line of code, not a few lines of class initialization and triggering. 
This is
by design. There are other solutions out there that go in a different path, 
which is
also fine.

Original comment by zisfor...@gmail.com on 21 Sep 2007 at 1:53

• Changed state: NotABug
• Added labels: Type-Other
• Removed labels: Type-Defect

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Sorry, don't have the energy to be part of a mailing list at the moment. 

But it's weird to add a function without the (). What I mean is for example:
Equetions.EASE_OUT
Just like the event system and lots of other options in as3.0. 

I understand that my idea doesn't make it more simple of flexible. But, I can 
imagine
you add the values of the normal data object into a special TweenInfo class of 
some
kind. 
Can't you build the option/possibility for the user to use that class? Than you 
can
add data by the params in the constructor of by instance variables. 
Withing the tweener you than can check if it is an normal object or such an 
instance.

Great news that you guys are looking into that event system :)

Original comment by theFlash...@gmail.com on 23 Sep 2007 at 3:08

[GoogleCodeExporter]

The mailing list is a suggestion because it's more suited for a discussion 
(which is
what we're doing now).

--

Constants such as Classname.CONSTANT are meant for options when you don't have 
access
to them in any other way. They could be added to the AS3 version, but this 
would be
redundant as it'd just be a third way of writing something. It's better to 
remember
the string name, or rather, just use the direct reference, as in:

Tweener.addTweene(myobj, {x:100, transition:Equations.easeOutQuad, time:1});

You can use the original 'mx' classes or Adobe's own equations there too.

Again, the strings are there to make things smaller and easier to remember. But
they're already the secondary approach, meant to make code smaller.

--

We'll be exposing the Tweening information class (right now, the TweenInfoObj) 
in due
time.

Original comment by zisfor...@gmail.com on 23 Sep 2007 at 3:33

[GoogleCodeExporter]

All right, I understand and respect the opinion about the constants. 

Great news that you are going to expose the Tweening information. 

This was all I wanted to know. 
Thnx for the answers. 

Original comment by theFlash...@gmail.com on 24 Sep 2007 at 5:41