Following the answer here, I have created a file called MyGlobals.as and placed some global variables and functions so that I can access it from anywhere within my project just like AS3 buil-in functions such as trace() method.
This is MyGlobals.as which is located in the src folder (top level folder)
package {
public var MessageQueue:Array = new Array();
public var main:Main;
public var BOOKING_STATUS_DATA:Object;
public function postMessage(msg:Object):void {
MessageQueue.push(msg);
}
public function processMessage():void {
var msg:Object = MessageQueue.pop();
if (msg) {
switch (msg.type) {
}
}
}
Looks like my IDE (FD4) is also recognizing all these functions and variables and also highlighting the varibles and functions just like any other built-in global functions. However, I am getting compilation errors "Accessing possibly undefined variable xxx". The code is as simple as trace(MessageQueue) inside my Main (or another classe).
I am wondering if there was any change Adboe has done recently that it can't be done now or am I missing something? I am not sure if I need to give any special instructions to FD to include this MyGlobals.as?
I am using FD4, Flex SKD 3.1, FP12.0
I am aware of the best practices which suggests to avoid using this type of method for creating global variables but I really need it for my project for my comfort which I feel best way (right now) when compared to take any other path which involves daunting task of code refactoring. I just want do something which can be done in AS3 which I guess is not a hack.
I've done some playing around; it looks like you can only define one (1) property or method at package level per .as file. It must be the same name (case-sensitive) as the .as file it is contained in.
So no, nothing has changed since the older Flash Versions.
In your case that would mean you need five separate ActionScript files along the lines of:
MessageQueue.as:
package
{
public var MessageQueue:Array;
}
main.as:
package
{
public var main:Main;
}
...etc. As you can see this is very cumbersome, another downside to the many others when using this approach. I suggest using the singleton pattern in this scenario instead.
package{
public class Singleton{
private static var _instance:Singleton=null;
private var _score:Number=0;
public function Singleton(e:SingletonEnforcer){
trace(‘new instance of singleton created’);
}
public static function getInstance():Singleton{
if(_instance==null){
_instance=new Singleton(new SingletonEnforcer());
}
return _instance;
}
public function get score():Number{
return _score;
}
public function set score(newScore:Number):void{
_score=newScore;
}
}
}
then iin your any as3 class if you import the singleton class
import Singleton
thn where u need to update the global var_score
use for example
var s:Singleton=Singleton.getInstance();
s.score=50;
trace(s.score);
same thing to display the 50 from another class
var wawa:Singleton=Singleton.getInstance();
trace(wawa.score)
Related
I am working in actionscript3, and since I'm self-taught, I think I've developed some bad habits, including coding on the timeline and using multiple scenes.
I am hoping to rectify this now that I'm working on a larger project.
Based on what I've read, linking multiple .fla files together is a better practice, each with their own document class. Is that correct?
If so, how do I load one .fla with its document class and then link that into the subsequent .fla file (instead of using scenes)? Or am I misinterpreting what was recommended?
Thanks!
There's no point to split your application in several loadable modules unless you have any of the following preconditions:
you have smart resource management to load and unload content
if you put everything into one file it gets just too big and hard to work with in design time or it takes far too long to compile
Regular AS3 alternative to working with scenes is creating/destroying content instances and using the main document class as their manager. You design content in the library and create behavior AS3 classes for them. Lets say, you have two content classes A and B. At the start the manager should show one of them and wait for the signal to show next one:
private var APage:A;
private var BPage:B;
gotoA();
function gotoA():void
{
if (BPage)
{
BPage.destroy();
removeChild(BPage);
BPage.removeEventListener(Event.CLOSE, gotoA);
}
APage = new A;
APage.addEventListener(Event.CLOSE, gotoB);
addChild(APage);
}
function gotoB():void
{
if (APage)
{
APage.destroy();
removeChild(APage);
APage.removeEventListener(Event.CLOSE, gotoB);
}
BPage = new B;
BPage.addEventListener(Event.CLOSE, gotoA);
addChild(BPage);
}
So, both A and B should have respective methods .destroy() that release used resources, unsubscribes methods from events, remove display objects, and so on, and they both should fire Event.CLOSE when they're done.
If you have many pages like that, you need to go for more algorithmic approach. For example, to create class BasicPage which will interact with manager and have the methods needed in all pages already declared:
package
{
import flash.display.Sprite;
class BasicPage extends Sprite
{
// A reference to the page manager instance.
public var Manager:PageManager;
public function destroy():void
{
while (numChildren > 0) removeChildAt(0);
Manager = null;
}
// Subclasses will have an access to this method to tell manager to show another page.
protected function showOtherPage(pageClass:Class):void
{
Manager.showPage(pageClass);
}
// A method that is called by manager when everything is ready.
// If page should take any actions on start it is a good idea to override this method.
public function startEngine():void
{
}
}
}
Then, example page A:
package
{
import flash.events.MouseEvent;
public class A extends BasicPage
{
// Lets say, class A in library have a designed button named Click.
public var Click:SimpleButton;
// We have things to undo here.
override public function destroy():void
{
Click.removeEventListener(MouseEvent.CLICK, onClick);
Click = null;
// Pass the destruction to superclass so it wraps its existence either.
super.destroy();
}
override public function startEngine():void
{
Click.addEventListener(MouseEvent.CLICK, onClick);
}
private function onClick(e:MouseEvent):void
{
// Lets use inherited method to show other page.
showOtherPage(B);
}
}
}
So, PageManager will be like:
package
{
public class PageManager extends Sprite
{
private var Page:BasicPage;
// constructor
function PageManager()
{
super();
showPage(A);
}
function showPage(pageClass:Class):void
{
if (Page)
{
Page.destroy();
removeChild(Page);
Page = null;
}
Page = new pageClass;
Page.Manager = this;
addChild(Page);
Page.startEngine();
}
}
}
This all could look scary at first, but it really isn't. PageManager will always have a current page, once there's a need to show another page, the current will be destroyed on a regular basis. Each page class will tend to its own content, which makes coding simpler, for you don't need to see the whole picture. If you need any persistent data, keep it in the PageManager so each page will have access to the data with no need for the pages to communicate with each other.
I have this singleton that I'm using as a wrapper for global variables and constants, but as soon as I make some [Bindable] I get a crash on start up w/a bunch of red text in my console.
TypeError: Error #1009: Cannot access a property or method of a null object reference.
at BrandGlobals$/get COLOUR_EVERYTHING_BACKGROUND()[C:\MyProject\src\BrandGlobals.as:14]
at BrandGlobals$cinit()
at global$init()[C:\MyProject\src\BrandGlobals.as:2]
at _mainWatcherSetupUtil/setup()
at main/initialize()[C:\MyProject\src\main.mxml:0]
at mx.managers::SystemManager/http://www.adobe.com/2006/flex/mx/internal::childAdded()[C:\autobuild\3.5.0\frameworks\projects\framework\src\mx\managers\SystemManager.as:2131]
at mx.managers::SystemManager/initializeTopLevelWindow()[C:\autobuild\3.5.0\frameworks\projects\framework\src\mx\managers\SystemManager.as:3400]
at mx.managers::SystemManager/http://www.adobe.com/2006/flex/mx/internal::docFrameHandler()[C:\autobuild\3.5.0\frameworks\projects\framework\src\mx\managers\SystemManager.as:3223]
at mx.managers::SystemManager/docFrameListener()[C:\autobuild\3.5.0\frameworks\projects\framework\src\mx\managers\SystemManager.as:3069]
BrandGlobals:
package {
public final class BrandGlobals {
[Bindable]public static var COLOUR_EVERYTHING_BACKGROUND:uint = 0xE010FF;
If I remove that [Bindable] and turn var to const there's no problem (except the obvious problem of not being able to set the variable outside of this file) but this doesn't work. Also, making the whole class [Bindable] instead of this one didn't work. When I hover my mouse over the COLOUR_EVERYTHING_BACKGROUND definition, it says "<exception thrown by getter>". 'Don't know what to think about that.
I might have guessed it was because it has no package, but I'm using another similar singleton which has [Bindable] variables and seems to work fine.
I never did get that [Bindable] twaddle.
I'm using the Flex 3.5 SDK.
I tried Brian's suggestion below, but it gave me pretty much the same error. I even tried:
{
_COLOUR_EVERYTHING_BACKGROUND = 0xE010FF;
trace("Var set."); //Breakpoint here
bLoadedFerCryinOutLoud = true;
}
[Bindable]private static var _COLOUR_EVERYTHING_BACKGROUND:uint;
private static var bLoadedFerCryinOutLoud:Boolean = false;
public static function get COLOUR_EVERYTHING_BACKGROUND():uint {
trace("Returning EVERYTHING background");
if (bLoadedFerCryinOutLoud)
return _COLOUR_EVERYTHING_BACKGROUND;
else return 0xFFFFFF;
}
What's more, if I put a breakpoint at that trace("Var set.");, Flash Builder complains that a break is not possible, because there is no executable code there.
I also noticed that in that call stack that I'm shown when this crash happens during a set and it seems to be the one that sets _COLOUR_EVERYTHING_BACKGROUND. But the only place where it is set is:
public static function SetBackground(oApp:UBIApplication):void {
_COLOUR_EVERYTHING_BACKGROUND = oApp.nBackgroundColour;
}
and breakpoints indicate that this is never called.
The documentation on using the tag has the following to say:
Using static properties as the source for data binding
You can use a static variable as the source for a data-binding expression. Flex performs the data binding once when the application starts, and again when the property changes.
You can automatically use a static constant as the source for a data-binding expression. Flex performs the data binding once when the application starts. Because the data binding occurs only once at application start up, you omit the [Bindable] metadata tag for the static constant. The following example uses a static constant as the source for a data-binding expression:
<fx:Script>
<![CDATA[
// This syntax casues a compiler error.
// [Bindable]
// public static var varString:String="A static var.";
public static const constString:String="A static const.";
]]>
</fx:Script>
<!-- This binding occurs once at application startup. -->
<s:Button label="{constString}"/>
Edit: You need to make sure that your variable is initialized before you try to read it. A static initializer is the way to go:
package {
public final class BrandGlobals {
{
_COLOUR_EVERYTHING_BACKGROUND = 0xE010FF;
trace("Var set."); //Breakpoint here
}
[Bindable]private static var _COLOUR_EVERYTHING_BACKGROUND:uint;
public static function get COLOUR_EVERYTHING_BACKGROUND():uint {
trace("Returning EVERYTHING background"); //Breakpoint here
return _COLOUR_EVERYTHING_BACKGROUND;
}
Putting in breakpoints in the places specified will let you verify that things are executing in the expected order
It turns out that the problem was assigning COLOUR_EVERYTHING_BACKGROUND to a static const elsewhere in the code, as a temporary measure. Hopefully I'll remember that assigning [Bindable]s to static consts is bad and if I don't, I'll remember the meaning of that particular cryptic reaction Flash Builder had. I'm starting to choke StackOverflow w/my questions about cryptic error messages.
My current project is in as3, but this is something I am curious about for other languages as well.
I'm attempting to use a factory object to create the appropriate object dynamically. My LevelFactory has a static method that returns a new instance of the level number provided to the method. In the code calling that method, I am able to dynamically create the buttons to call the levels like so:
for (var i:int = 1; i < 4; i++) {
var tempbutton:Sprite = createButton("Level " + i, 25, 25 +(60 * i), start(i));
_buttons.push(button);
}
This code just creates a simple button with the given arguments (ButtonText, x, y, function). It's working fine. The buttons are created, and clicking on one of them calls this method with the appropriate argument
private function start(level:int):Function {
return function(e:MouseEvent):void {
disableButtons();
newLevel = LevelFactory.createLevel(level);
addChild(newLevel);
}
}
This is all working fine; I'm just providing it for background context. The question I have is this: Is it possible to dynamically choose the type of object that my static function returns? Currently, I have am doing it as follows
public static function createLevel(level:int):Level {
var result:Level;
switch(level) {
case 1: result = new Level1(); break;
case 2: result = new Level2(); break;
//etc
}
return result;
}
I should note that all of these Level1, Level2, etc. classes extend my base level class. (Yay polymorphism!) What I would like to do is be able to do something along the lines of
public static function createLevel(level:int):Level {
var result:Level;
var levelType:String = "Level" + level;
return new levelType();
}
Obviously it's not going to work with a string like that, but is there any way to accomplish this in as3? What about other languages, such as Java or Python? Can you dynamically choose what type of child class to instantiate?
Update:
import Levels.*;
import flash.events.*;
import flash.utils.*;
public class LevelFactory
{
public static function createLevel(level:int):Level {
var ref:Class = getDefinitionByName('Levels.' + 'Level' + level) as Class;
var result:Level = new ref();
return result;
}
}
Update/Edit: getDefinitionByName seems to be what I'm looking for, but it has a problem. It seems that the compiler will strip unused imports, which means that unless I declare each subclass in the code ahead of time, this method will get a reference error. How can I get around the need to declare each class separately (which defeats the purpose of dynamic instantiation)?
Yes, you sure can, and it's very similar to the string thing that you've provided. The only thing that you are missing is the getDefinitionByName method: http://help.adobe.com/en_US/FlashPlatform/reference/actionscript/3/flash/utils/package.html#getDefinitionByName()
You can generate whatever class name you want, and what this method does is that it searches for that class in it's namespace, and if it finds it - it returns it as a class:
var ClassReference:Class = getDefinitionByName("flash.display.Sprite") as Class;
var instance:Object = new ClassReference();
This piece of code will instantiate a Sprite. This way you can instantiate your classes without all those switches and cases, especially when you have to make a hundred levels :)
Hope that helps! Cheers!
Edit:
In your case, the code should be:
var ref:Class = getDefinitionByName('com.path.Level' + index) as Class;
var level:Level = new ref(); // it will actually be Level1 Class
Since Andrey didn't quite finish helping me out, I am writing up a more complete answer to the question after much research.
getDefinitionByName definitely has the use I am looking for. However, unlike its use in Java, you HAVE to have a hard reference to the class you want instantiated somewhere in your code. Merely imported the class is not enough; the reason for this is that the compiler will strip the reference from any unused import to save space. So if you import the package of classes you want to choose dynamically but don't have a hard reference to them, the compiler will de-reference them. This will lead to a run-time error when the program cannot find the appropriate reference to your class.
Note that you don't actually have to do anything with the reference. You just have to declare a reference so that it can be found at run-time. So the following code will work to eliminate the switch-case statement and allow me to dynamically declare which class I am using at run-time.
{
import Levels.*;
import flash.events.*;
import flash.utils.*;
/**
*
* Returns the requested level using the createLevel class
* ...
* #author Joshua Zollinger
*/
public class LevelFactory
{
Level1, Level2, Level3, Level4, Level5, Level6, Level7;
public static function createLevel(level:int):Level {
var ref:Class = getDefinitionByName('Levels.Level' + level) as Class;
var result:Level = new ref(); // it will actually be the correct class
return result;
}}}
The obvious downside to this is that you still have to have a hard-coded reference to every class that can be instantiated like this. In this case, if I try to create a Level8 instance, it will through a run-time error because Level8 is not referenced. So every time I create a new level, I still have to go add a reference to it; I can't just use the reference dynamically.
There are supposedly ways around this that I have not tested yet, such as putting the code for the classes in a separate SWF and importing the SWF at run-time or using outside libraries that will have different functionality. If anyone has a solid way to get a truly dynamic reference that doesn't require a hard coded reference anywhere, I would love to hear about it.
Of course, it's still a lot cleaner this way; I don't have a extensive switch case statement to pack all the levels. And it's easier and faster to add a reference to the list than creating a new case in a switch. Plus it is closer to dynamic programming, which is usually a good thing.
I'm dealing with the scenario whereby my code might be included in other Flash content either included via import .as commands and then referenced as a Singleton, e.g.
import com.as3.Singleton;
...
...
Singleton.birth();
Singleton.getInstance().test();
...but also imported as a runtime library; with the Singleton class exported as a .swf beforehand (instead of pre-baking the class).
How should I reference the Singleton once Event.COMPLETE has fired off from the Loader that brings in the swf? Normally I'd code something like:
public function singletonCompleteHandler(event:Event):void {
var mySing:Singleton = _loader.contentLoaderInfo.content as Singleton;
}
...but I know I don't want to be referencing the singleton via a "var" reference. I'm not explaining very well, but basically once the singleton.swf has loaded in I need to use the code within it within a singleton model (i.e. ensure there's only one instance of it throughout my application).
Copy of the Singleton class included below (thanks for any thoughts on this by the way).
package
{
public class Singleton extends Sprite
{
private static var instance:Singleton;
public function Singleton() {
if (instance) {
throw new Error("Singleton can only be accessed through Singleton.getInstance()");
}
}
public static function birth() {
if (instance == null) {
instance = new Singleton();
}
}
public static function getInstance():Singleton {
return instance;
}
public function test():void {
trace("Testing our singleton.");
}
}
}
First of all, if you're loading it dynamically, then you don't want to have a reference to it in your loading SWF (otherwise it would defeat the point).
So I'm guessing you're looking to do something like this:
function completeHandler(event:Event):void
{
var singleton:Object = loader.contentLoaderInfo.content;
var instance:IMyObject = singleton.getInstance();
instance.test();
}
IMyObject is of course optional here. If you do it like this, your singleton instance will have to implement IMyObject.
interface IMyObject
{
function test():void;
}
This is all to avoid having to reference the actual class in your loading SWF. Like I said, the interface is optional: you can just use Object instead.
... and now on to the main point: load the singleton SWF into the loading SWF's own "application domain".
http://livedocs.adobe.com/flash/9.0/ActionScriptLangRefV3/flash/system/LoaderContext.html#applicationDomain
var lc:LoaderContext = new LoaderContext();
lc.applicationDomain = ApplicationDomain.currentDomain;
loader.load(new URLRequest("Singleton.swf"), lc);
You see, normally when you load a SWF, it gets loaded into its own application domain. But this makes it impossible to enforce the singleton pattern on the loaded SWF, because each instance of the class can live in its own application domain (hence you can end up with multiple instances). So if you want to enforce this across multiple SWF loads then you want to load it into the loading SWF's application domain.
If your question is "How should I reference the Singleton once Event.COMPLETE has fired off from the Loader that brings in the swf?", then you can do it with:
var Singleton:Object = _loader.contentLoaderInfo.applicationDomain.getDefinition('Singleton');
But, I'm not sure what you mean about not wanting to use a "var" reference.
On a side-note, there's a good chance a global variable would be a better option than a Singleton class for an API.
package myPackage
{
public var myGlobal:MyGlobal = new MyGlobal();
}
Which you can access with myPackage.myGlobal
I'm creating a game where a lot of images are being used in Actionscript / Flex 3 (Flash). Now that I've reached the designer stage, I have to work out a structural way of using embedded images (which have to be manipulated with rotation, color, etc.).
Unfortunately, after investigating a bit, it looks like you have to manually embed images before you can use them. I currently have it setup like this:
Resource.as class file:
package
{
public final class Resource
{
[Embed (source="/assets/ships/1.gif" )]
public static const SHIPS_1:Class;
}
}
So, just for one ship I so for have to:
Put the image in the correct folder with the correct name
Name it in the same way in the Resource.as file
Create the constant with the same name in the Resource.as file
Even though this should all be possible by simply putting the file in a specified folder.
To make things even worse, I still have to call it using:
var test:Bitmap = new Resource.SHIPS_1();
There must be better ways to handle resources when creating very huge applications? Imagine I need thousands of images, this system simply wouldn't fit.
If you need to handle a large number of resources you can follow these 3 steps:
Place them in an uncompressed zip archive
Embed the zip file as binary data:
[Embed(source = 'resources.zip', mimeType = 'application/octet-stream')]
Access the resources using FZip
If you choose a different method that involves loading external files be aware that some flash game websites require the games they host to be contained within a single swf file.
instead of
var test:Bitmap = new Resource.SHIPS_1();
Use
myImage.source = Resource.SHIPS_1;
The embedding is correct. :D the way you use it is wrong :)
Adrian
This is really what Flash CS4 is for. Your way seems fine to me though - although I wouldn't use all caps for a class name even if it is a constant. Just put your head down and get copy-pasting!
Alternatively you could load the files at runtime.
This is old but since I stumbled across it searching for something different I'll write here for future generations : )
I use a different approach. I create a swf movie with flash professional and import all graphics in it and then mark them all for "Export for ActionScript".
Compile the swf and in your main project embed only the swf and access all the graphics through it...
I find this approach much more organized. Why write the whole resources class when you can make it by importing files right? ;)
I just watched this great tutorial on the Starling framework:
http://www.hsharma.com/tutorials/starting-with-starling-ep-3-sprite-sheets/
It sounds like spritesheets are exactly what you're looking for:
You bundle all your individual textures into one big texture that is called spritesheet and create an xml file that contains information where the textures are within the spritesheet. In order to do that you can use this tool:
http://www.codeandweb.com/texturepacker
I'm not sure if you can use it for commercial projects and the amount of textures you're speaking of doesn't sound like you're doing this just as a hobby, so you might want to check the license. There's a pro version available, too.
Texturepacker creates two files: spritesheet.png and spritesheet.xml. You just copy them into your project.
Then you add this code to one of your classes.
private static var gameTextureAtlas:TextureAtlas;
[Embed(source="../media/graphics/mySpriteSheet.png")]
public static const AtlasTextureGame:Class;
[Embed(source="../media/graphics/mySpritesheet.xml", mimeType="application/octet-stream")]
public static const AtlasXmlGame:Class;
public static function getAtlas():TextureAtlas
{
if(gameTextureAtlas==null)
{
var texture:Texture=getTexture("AtlasTextureGame");
var xml:XML=XML(new AtlasXmlGame());
gameTextureAtlas=new TextureAtlas(texture,xml);
}
return gameTextureAtlas;
}
Now you can access all the textures of the spritesheet by calling
YourClass.getAtlas().getTexture("name");
It's simply awesome. When you're using texturepacker the filename of each of the sprites you bundled into the spritesheet becomes its texturename.
This is probably too late to help you, but I hope that future visitors can profit from this elegant solution.
I would like to emphasize that this answer is basically an excerpt from sharma's tutorial. I even felt free to reproduce the code he used in his screencast. All the credit goes to him
It depends how big your individual images are but you could put them all in one image like a spritesheet. If you want to draw a particular ship use the correct xy offset in the image for that ship and use copyPixels to draw it to your bitmap.
package
{
public final class Resource
{
[Embed (source="/assets/ships/1.gif" )]
public static const SHIPS_1:Class;
}
}
[Embed (source="/assets/ships/1.gif" )]
public static const SHIPS_1:Class;
I like to do my Library classes like this.
I took GSkinners code for the singleton: http://gskinner.com/blog/archives/2006/07/as3_singletons.html
package
{
import flash.display.Bitmap;
import flash.display.BitmapData;
public class Lib
{
/*
Make this an Singleton, so you only load all the images only Once
*/
private static var instance:Lib;
public static function getInstance():Lib {
if (instance == null) {
instance = new Lib(new SingletonBlocker());
}
return instance;
}
public function Lib(p_key:SingletonBlocker):void {
// this shouldn't be necessary unless they fake out the compiler:
if (p_key == null) {
throw new Error("Error: Instantiation failed: Use Singleton.getInstance() instead of new.");
}
}
/*
The actual embedding
*/
[Embed(source="assets/images/someImage.png")]
private var ImageClass:Class;
private var _imageClass:Bitmap = new ImageClass() as Bitmap;
[Embed(source="assets/images/someOtherImage.png")]
private var OtherImageClass:Class;
private var _otherImageClass:Bitmap = new ImageClass() as Bitmap;
public function get imgClass():Bitmap{
return _imageClass;
}
public function get imgClassData():BitmapData{
return _imageClass.BitmapData;
}
public function get otherImageClass():Bitmap{
return _otherImageClass;
}
public function get otherImageClassData():BitmapData{
return _otherImageClass.BitmapData;
}
}
}
internal class SingletonBlocker {}
[Embed (source="/assets/images/123.png" )]
public static const className:Class;
Good idea, lhk
That is nice solution like Source-Engine with vtf and vmt
vtf = image
vmt = script ( like xml or javascript )
Good i would like to suggest for TexturePacker, TexturePath or TextureTarget :P
Thanky ou for tip.
For example:
mytexture.js:
xml or javascript:
function mytexture(){ basedir = "/assets/mytexture.png", normalmap =
"/assets/mytexture_bump.png", normalcube ) [ 1, 1, 1 ] };
I don't think because default texture gets error somewhere mytexture.png doesn't exists than it happens again :)
[Embed(source="../assets/editors/error_texture.png")] public static
const ERROR_TEX:Class; ...
How do i know because Actionscript 3 should "read" to javascript like jsBirdge or ExternalInterface.call();
Is it possible?