I want to add to my project CardSO - a scriptable object. I want to give it a name, points and for some cards a special behavior. how can I add a function to the SO field?
for most of the cards, it can be empty (or just returning 0), I hoped I can write a function the takes List and return int.
Any thoughts?
My current code layout:
using UnityEngine;
[CreateAssetMenu(fileName = "CardSO", menuName = "New CardSO", order = 0)]
public class CardSO : ScriptableObject
{
public string name;
public int points;
public Sprite Sprite;
// public int SpecialBehavior(List<CardSO>);
}
Thank You!
Well ... just implement it. If you need most cards without it why not have a base class and make the method virtual
// Whatever shall be the default behavior
public virtual int SpecialBehavior(List<CardSO> cards) => -1;
and then make a special card child class that can override this method and return whatever you need
[CreateAssetMenu]
public class SpecialCardSO : CardSO
{
public override int SpecialBehavior (List<CardSO> cards)
{
// or whatever
return cards.Length;
}
}
Related
How can I create a custom action for an actor in libgdx? If I can't, than is there at least an action to run a custom piece of code (eg. call a method action)? Thanks.
EDIT:
I created this class :
class GapSizeAction extends TemporalAction {
private float newSize;
private Blocker blocker;
public static GapSizeAction getRotateAction(float newSize, float duration) {
return new GapSizeAction(newSize, duration);
}
public GapSizeAction(float newSize, float duration) {
super(duration);
System.out.println("Construct");
this.blocker = (Blocker)target;
this.newSize = newSize;
}
private float start, end;
protected void begin() {
System.out.println("Begin");
start = blocker.gap;
}
protected void update(float percent) {
blocker.gap = (start + (end - start) * percent);
}
}
The problem is that I am using a custom actor with a gap member (float). I try to cast the target to a blocker so that I can access the gap member variable, but gap ends up being null. I can confirm that gap is not null, I initialize it in the constructor. The blocker (Custom actor) is not null either. Am I going about this wrong?
Your problem is the line this.blocker = (Blocker)target; in your constructor. When the constructor is called, the action hasn't been set on a target yet, so target is null (and so will be blocker). Also, since you're changing a single float, you can extend FloatAction and save yourself some code. I would write your class as below. The constructor should be empty to support easy pooling, and you can set it up in your static factory method.
class GapSizeAction extends FloatAction {
public static GapSizeAction getRotateAction(float newSize, float duration){
GapSizeAction action = Actions.action(GapSizeAction.class);
action.setEnd(newSize);
action.setDuration(duration);
return action;
}
protected void begin () {
if (target instanceof Blocker)
setStart(((Blocker)target).gap);
else
Gdx.app.logError("Target is not a blocker: " + target.toString());
super.begin();
}
protected void update (float percent) {
super.update(percent);
if (target instanceof Blocker)
((Blocker)target).gap = getValue();
}
}
Fade In Action for example :
actor.AddAction(Actions.fadeIn(2.0f));
Hi my problem is i have to be able to reference certain fields inside my Customer object.]
I am studying AS3 at the moment and being taught custom classes, but we are taught to use the toString method of returning a value i guess you could call it, what i need is to be able to call one field to identify the object i.e. name field from the object in the array, here's my code
package valueObjects
{
public class Person
{
//instance variables
protected var name:String;
protected var address:String;
protected var phoneNo:String;
public function Person(n:String,a:String,p:String)
{
name=n;
address=a;
phoneNo=p;
}
public function toString():String
{
//returns string
return name+":"+address+":"+phoneNo;
}
}
}
some reason it will not put that whole block of code together like THIS IS
So now how do i define it not toString but in object form ??
I think what you are trying to do is access the name, address and phoneNo vars from a different class?
If so, you have to declare them as public vars instead of private vars.
public var name:String; //now this can be accessed from other classes: thisClassInstance.name
If you want to have them read-only from other classes, you have to use a getter method:
protected var name_:String; //local var name for full access;
public function get name():String {
return name_; //this can be access by doing thisClassInstance.name
}
I have the two following classes:
public class Parent{
static internal const _name:String = "Parent";
public function get name():String{
return _name;
}
}
public class Child{
static internal const _name:String = "Child";
}
If I create an instance of class Child and call its name() getter, since it will call the name() method it inherits from Parent, it returns "Parent". I could, of course, override the name() method:
public class Child{
static internal const _name:String = "Child";
override public function get name():String{
return _name;
}
}
That returns "Child". However, it seems silly to have to copy the exact same code of the method from the parent. Is there any simpler way to do this?
I would take a different approach by making the "name" property a requirement for the parent's constructor:
public class Parent
{
static internal var _name : String;
public function Parent(name : String = "Parent") {
_name = name;
}
public function get name() : String {
return _name;
}
}
Child Class:
public class Child extends Parent
{
public function Child() {
super("Child");
}
}
Firstly, you cannot override static methods or properties - they are not inherited, so no override for them.
Secondly, if you declared a constant to be of a complex type, it is not really a constant. I.e. if it is an object, then you can change its keys / values, if it is an array, you can add / remove members and so on.
But the desire to make this functionality more generic is understandable. So, what I'd do:
Have some property outside both parent and child, let say in class X, or package Y. Let it be package Y. So, you'd create a dictionary in package Y, let it be Y.names and in your name getter you'd do:
import Y.names;
. . .
public function get name() {
return names[(this as Object).constructor];
}
your names variable would be:
package Y {
public var names:Dictionary = generateNames();
internal function generateNames():Dictionary {
var result:Dictionary = new Dictionary();
result[ChildClass] = "child";
result[ParentClass] = "parent";
. . .
return result;
}
}
This way it would be sufficient to only implement name getter in super-class, and all inheriting classes will be able to use super-class code as is, no need to change anything. However, this means that some (maybe important) information pertaining to this class will be stored elsewhere (may be difficult to find, this is not the common way people program in AS3).
your implementation of get name should look like this, then the getter is one and each of the new classes needs to have it's own public static var _name defined:
//in the base class
public function get name():String
{
var _sName:String;
if ((this as Object).constructor._name)
{
_sName = (this as Object).constructor._name;
}
else
{
try
{
var o:Object = getSuperClass(this);
while (o)
{
if (o._name)
{
_sName = o._name;
break;
}
o = getSuperClass(o);
}
}
catch (e:*)
{}
}
return _sName;
}
//as found here: http://www.actionscriptdeveloper.co.uk/getting-the-class-of-an-object-in-as3/
public static function getSuperClass(o: Object): Object
{
var n: String = getQualifiedSuperclassName(o);
if (n == null)
return(null);
return getDefinitionByName(n);
}
the static members can be accessed only via class reference which we can get from constructor object, "this" will point to the current class in the inheritance chain so you can call this in parent class and it will point to a Child in a Child class.
[EDIT]
I've modified it so it tests for existance of the public static property _name if not found on "this" instance then in a loop the parent class is checked until one is found - like inheritance:)
I'm using this feature to create clone method: constructor as helper in clone method implementation
best regards
Why don't you store such a constant within a corresponding function instead of declaring an inaccessible constant?
class Parent {
...
public function get name():String { return 'Parent'; }
}
class Child extends Parent {
...
override public function get name():String { return 'Child'; }
}
By the way, if your Parent class is a descendant of DisplayObject, you should be careful with name property, as it's needed sometimes by operating code, e.g. getChildByName().
I have found something that seems to work. Any feedback is greatly appreciated:
public class Parent{
prototype._name = "Parent";
public function get name():String{
return this["_name"];
}
}
public class Child{
prototype._name = "Child";
}
I have a base class like this
class Base {
public var space:Number;
}
which gets extended by
class Desc extends Base {
override public function set space( space:Number ):void {
//code
}
}
This doesn't compile. Say, you don't have control of the base class, what ways is there implement the same thing?
The obvious is create a function setSpace(), but this object is being embedded in an already existing system that use the public space.
Thanks in advance.
Your base class should be defined that way:
class Base {
// Don't use public variables. Make them private and define setters and getters
private var space_:Number;
public function get space():Number {
return space_;
}
public function set space(v:Number):void {
if (space_ === v) return;
space_ = v;
}
}
And then it can be overriden that way:
class Desc extends Base {
override public function set space( space:Number ):void {
//code
}
}
Edit:
I missed the part where you say you don't have control over the base class. In that case, hope that space is defined as a getter/setter (it should be if the class is implemented properly). If not, you'll indeed have to use a function such as getSpace and setSpace.
From Adobe:
Class member variables that are declared using the var keyword cannot
be overridden in a subclass.
Using a setter is not an option in your case. If you need to preserve the interface, use composition instead of inheritance:
class Desc {
private var _base:Base;
public function set space(space:Number):void {
//code
this._base.space = space;
}
}
I need to run code in a class declaration before its instanciation. This would be especially useful to automatically register classes in a factory. See:
// Main.as
public class Main extends Sprite
{
public function Main() : void
{
var o : Object = Factory.make(42);
}
}
// Factory.as
public class Factory
{
private static var _factory : Array = new Array();
public static function registerClass(id : uint, c : Class) : void
{
_factory[id] = function () : Object { return new c(); };
}
public static function make(id : uint) : Object
{
return _factory[id]();
}
}
// Foo.as
public class Foo
{
// Run this code before instanciating Foo!
Factory.registerClass(CLASS_ID, Foo);
public static const CLASS_ID : uint = 42;
}
AFAIK, the JIT machine for the ActionScript language won't let me do that since no reference to Foo is made in the Main method. The Foo class being generated, I can't (and don't want to) register the classes in Main: I'd like to register all the exported classes in a specific package (or library). Ideally, this would be done through package introspection, which doesn't exist in ActionScript 3.
Do you know any fix (or other solution) to my design issue?
I'm not 100% sure sure if this is what you're after, but have you tried using a Static Initializer?
public class Foo
{
// Static Initializer
{
Factory.registerClass(CLASS_ID, Foo);
}
public static const CLASS_ID : uint = 42;
}
http://life.neophi.com/danielr/2006/12/static_initializers_in_as3.html
You can use compiler options to include class byte code in the resulting SWF or SWC. But you have to compile with MXMLC (or COMPC for SWCs).