In PHP it's trivial to override properties of a class in a subclass. For instance:
class Generic_Enemy {
protected $hp = 100;
protected $str = 5;
//...
}
class Boss_Enemy extends Generic Enemy {
protected $hp = 1000;
protected $str = 25;
}
Which is extremely convenient because at-a-glance you can see in what ways the subclass differs from the parent class.
In AS3 the only way I've found is through getters, which really isn't elegant at all:
public class GenericEnemy {
private var _hp:uint = 100;
private var _str:uint = 25;
public function get hp():uint {
return _hp;
}
public function get str():uint {
return _str;
}
}
public class BossEnemy extends GenericEnemy {
override public function get hp():uint {
return 1000;
}
override public function get str():uint {
return 25;
}
}
Is there a nicer way of doing this that aligns with the PHP approach?
Specifically: let's say I'm writing an API that will let a developer easily spin off his own Enemies. I would rather document that you just have to override hp and str properties rather than explain that they have to create a new getter for each property they wish to override. It's a matter of trying to create the cleanest API and the easiest to document and maintain.
Sometimes ya just have to write the SO question in order to see the (obvious) answer:
public class GenericEnemy {
protected var _hp:uint = 100;
protected var _str:uint = 25;
public function GenericEnemy(){
//...
}
}
public class BossEnemy extends GenericEnemy {
public function BossEnemy(){
_hp = 1000;
_str = 50;
super();
}
}
Related
I'm having an issue with a little app I'm trying to create at the moment, it's my first try and dealing with classes but for some reason I can't create any instances of the class even if it's imported into the document. Here's the code for the class (named "Players"):
package
{
public class Player
{
public function Player(name_:String)
{
}
public var name_:String;
private var alignment:int;
public var healed:Boolean = false;
public var revealed:Boolean = false;
public var attacked:Boolean = false;
public var dead:Boolean = false;
public function action(target:Player)
{
}
public function describe():String
{
}
}
public class Citizen extends Player
{
public function Citizen(name_:String)
{
alignment = 1;
}
override public function action(target:Player)
{
}
override public function describe():String
{
return "Citizen";
}
}
public class Investigator extends Player
{
public function Investigator(name_:String)
{
alignment = 1;
}
override public function action(target:Player)
{
target.revealed = true;
}
override public function describe():String
{
return "Cop";
}
}
public class Doctor extends Player
{
public function Doctor(name_:String)
{
alignment = 1;
}
override public function action(target:Player)
{
target.healed = true;
}
override public function describe():String
{
return "Doctor";
}
}
public class Mafioso extends Player
{
public function Mafioso(name_:String)
{
alignment = -1;
}
override public function action(target:Player)
{
target.attacked = true;
}
override public function describe():String
{
return "Mafia";
}
}
}
And the code which creates the instance:
import Players;
stop();
var totalplayers:Number;
var playerArray:Array = new Array();
var playerType:Array = ["Citizen","Cop","Doctor","Mafia"];
var test:Citizen = new Citizen("James");
Both are in the same folder. I get the error code 1046 described in the title but I honestly have no idea why, flash picks it up in the code hints yet it comes up with that! Any help would be appreciated.
Also secondary question, I'll never initiate the Player class (except through inheritance with the other classes), so can I make it private?
Thanks
I'm assuming all that code is in a file called Players.as.
This is wrong. Each file should contain one class and the class should be the same name as the .as file.
You currently have two classes (Player and Citizen) within one file.
What you need to do is take the Player class you've defined and place it in its own .as. file with the same name (Player). Do the same for Citizen.
Then you can use:
import Player;
import Citizen;
Though this won't be necessary because you don't need to import classes that are in the same directory that you're trying to access it from.
As for the error, you're getting that because Flash is trying to find the class Players and you don't have a class with that name (just a file with that name).
Per your secondary question regarding whether ActionScript supports private classes, if you have a class that would not otherwise be accessed except internally by a public class you may define it as internal.
Internal classes are visible to references inside the current package.
If you do not want a class to be publicly visible outside a package, place the class inside a package and mark the class with the internal attribute. Alternatively, you can omit both the internal and public attributes, and the compiler automatically adds the internal attribute for you. You can also define a class to only be visible inside the source file in which it is defined. Place the class at the bottom of your source file, below the closing curly bracket of the package definition.
In the following example, both X and Y classes are defined in a single file (X.as). X may be referenced and instantiated as normal; however, Y is internal to X and only visible from from the scope of X.
package
{
import flash.display.Sprite;
public class X extends Sprite
{
public function X()
{
super();
var y:Y = new Y();
}
}
}
internal class Y
{
public function Y()
{
trace("internal Y ctor.");
}
}
This pattern is helpful when a class requires small data models that would not otherwise be accessed outside of a class.
Agree with others here should be as shown below (note filenames match class names, file names are denoted in brackets above code blocks). Also you wrote import Players instead of import Player, regardless as the other poster wrote if all classes are currently in the default package the import is unnecessary.
[Player.as]
package
{
public class Player
{
public function Player(name_:String)
{
}
public var name_:String;
private var alignment:int;
public var healed:Boolean = false;
public var revealed:Boolean = false;
public var attacked:Boolean = false;
public var dead:Boolean = false;
public function action(target:Player)
{
}
public function describe():String
{
}
}
}
[Citizen.as]
package
{
public class Citizen extends Player
{
public function Citizen(name_:String)
{
alignment = 1;
}
override public function action(target:Player)
{
}
override public function describe():String
{
return "Citizen";
}
}
}
[Investigator.as]
package
{
public class Investigator extends Player
{
public function Investigator(name_:String)
{
alignment = 1;
}
override public function action(target:Player)
{
target.revealed = true;
}
override public function describe():String
{
return "Cop";
}
}
}
[Doctor.as]
package
{
public class Doctor extends Player
{
public function Doctor(name_:String)
{
alignment = 1;
}
override public function action(target:Player)
{
target.healed = true;
}
override public function describe():String
{
return "Doctor";
}
}
}
[Mafioso.as]
package
{
public class Mafioso extends Player
{
public function Mafioso(name_:String)
{
alignment = -1;
}
override public function action(target:Player)
{
target.attacked = true;
}
override public function describe():String
{
return "Mafia";
}
}
}
It's unfortunate there's no abstract classes as this would be an ideal situation for an abstract class and abstract methods.
I am a little confused by this concept.
If I override a public function in a base class, I would have thought that this override function is called and the original is ignored? though this doesn't seem to be the case...
public class AbstractScreen extends Sprite
{
public function AbstractScreen()
{
}
public function updateLanguage():void
{
trace("WARNING: need to override public function updateLanguage()");
}
}
public class Start extends AbstractScreen
{
override public function updateLanguage():void
{
title.text = _model.language.start
title.setTextFormat(titleFormat);
}
}
public class ViewManager extends Sprite
{
private var _model:Model;
private var _screens:Array;
public function ViewManager(model:Model)
{
_model = model;
_model.addEventListener(AppEvent.INIT_VIEW, initViews);
_model.addEventListener(AppEvent.UPDATE_VIEW, updateView);
_model.addEventListener(AppEvent.CHANGED_LANGUAGE, changeLanguage);
}
private function initViews(e:AppEvent):void
{
trace("View Manager: initViews");
_screens = new Array(new Start(_model), new TakePhoto(_model));
dispatchEvent(new ViewEvent(ViewEvent.VIEW_READY));
}
private function changeLanguage(e:AppEvent):void
{
for each (var screen:AbstractScreen in _screens)
{
screen.updateLanguage();
}
}
}
If my model dispatches a CHANGED_LANGUAGE event, the text in the views gets updated, But I also get a trace of "WARNING: need to override public function updateLanguage()" What could I be doing wrong?
You are right, this should not call the base class function. Are you sure there is no call to
super.initLanguage()
within your override?
Most IDE's add this call in the function body automatically, if they create an override for you.
EDIT
From your edit I see your are iterating over two objects of the types Start and TakePhoto. I assume TakePhoto is also derived from AbstractScreen and the trace may be comming from this one.
Also I suggest to use the abstract base class in your iteration.
for each (var screen:AbstractScreen in _screens)
{
screen.updateLanguage();
}
I am trying to create a basic functionality in AS3.
I have a class like this:
package tax
{
public class Calculator
{
public function Calculator()
{
}
private var grwage:Number;
private var taxes:Number;
private var superannuation:Number;
private var insurance:Number;
private var net:Number;
public function getGrwage():Number {
return grwage;
}
public function setGrwage(grwage:Number):void {
this.grwage = grwage;
}
public function getTaxes():Number {
return grwage;
}
public function setTaxes(taxes:Number):void {
this.taxes = grwage * 0.2;
}
public function getSup():Number {
return superannuation;
}
public function setSup(superannuation:Number):void {
this.superannuation = superannuation * 0.05;
}
public function getIns():Number {
return insurance;
}
public function setIns(insurance:Number):void {
this.insurance = insurance * 0.1;
}
public function getNet():Number {
return net;
}
public function setNet(net:Number):void {
this.net = grwage - taxes - superannuation - insurance;
}
}
}
Just some getters and setters.
And in my mxml file:
import tax.Calculator;
public var calculate:Calculator = new Calculator();
calculate.setGrwage(1000);
trace(calculate.getTaxes());
trace(calculate.getSup());
trace(calculate.getIns());
trace(calculate.getNet());
I get an error 1120 Access to undefinded property when I try to access calculate. Do you have any ideas?
Thanks.
I guess you're mixing up things a bit between getters and setters. If a variable depends on another, you have to write the calculation in its getter. This variable shouldn't exist as a private member and the accesses to it must always be done through the appropriate getter.
for example:
public function getNet():Number {
return getGrwage() - getTaxes() - getSup() - getIns();
}
So here, you only need one setter (setGrwage), you can remove the others ones and put the calculation in the getters.
Note that there is a more appropriate syntax for setters and getters in AS3.
class GetSet
{
private var privateProperty:String;
public function get publicAccess():String
{
return privateProperty;
}
public function set publicAccess(setValue:String):void
{
privateProperty = setValue;
}
}
There are multiple issues with your class. So lets redesign it
The main issue you had was you were not initiating the vars before you accessed them as they had a NULL value the flash player was throwing you that error.
As you can see in the constructor I set a default value of 0 so that they will never be NULL.
package tax {
public class Calculator{
private var _grwage:Number;
private var _taxes:Number;
private var _superannuation:Number;
private var _insurance:Number;
public function Calculator() {
this._grwage = 0;
this._taxes = 0;
this._superannuation = 0;
this._insurance = 0;
}
public function get grwage():Number {
return this._grwage;
}
public function set grwage(val:Number):void {
this._grwage = val;
}
public function get taxes():Number {
return this._taxes;
}
public function set taxes(val:Number):void {
this._taxes = val * 0.2;
}
public function get superannuation():Number {
return this._superannuation;
}
public function set superannuation(val:Number):void {
this._superannuation = val * 0.05;
}
public function get insurance():Number {
return this._insurance;
}
public function set insurance(val:Number):void {
this._insurance = val* 0.1;
}
public function get net():Number {
return this._grwage - this._taxes - this._superannuation - this._insurance;
}
}
}
import tax.Calculator;
public var calculate:Calculator = new Calculator();
//Now due to the fact we are using true setter/getter methods.
calculate.grwage = 1000;
trace( calculate.taxes); // should be 0 as we are defaulting to the initial value
trace( calculate.superannuation );// should be 0 as we are defaulting to the initial value
trace( calculate.insurance );// should be 0 as we are defaulting to the initial value
trace( calculate.net );// should be 1000 as we are defaulting to the initial values of everything but grwage
The answers here are all good, but they all miss the primary point:
You're trying to get your variables before you set them.
import tax.Calculator;
public var calculate:Calculator = new Calculator();
calculate.setGrwage(1000);
trace(calculate.getTaxes());
trace(calculate.getSup());
trace(calculate.getIns());
trace(calculate.getNet());
This will throw an error (due to the way you've set up your class), because you never called setSup(), setIns(), and setNet() before trying to use them.
While your class may not be written in the best way, it is syntactically sound.
Try calling each setter before your getter. I think you'll solve your issue.
I need to increment an integer variable in a function within the document class upon transpiring event in another class. I can't seem to figure out how to call the function and reference the variable.
as3 newbie, please help!
The proper scope needs to be in place and the proper packaging.
Declare a static variable to handle your access to the Main Document Class
private static var _instance:Main;
public static function get instance():Main { return _instance; }
public function Main() { // constructor
_instance = this;
}
Declare some getters and setters in the Main Document Class
private var _foo:int = 0;
public function get foo():int{
return _foo;
}
public function set foo(value:int):void {
_foo= value;
}
And then in any class you need you can change to something as follows,
public class O {
public function O() {
Main.instance.set(Main.instance.get() + 1);
}
}
simple example, defining a variable 'test' in the document class:
package {
public class DocumentClass extends Sprite {
public static var test:Number = 3;
public function DocumentClass() {
test = 4;
}
}
}
now access the 'test' variable in another class:
package {
public class OtherClass extends Sprite {
public function OtherClass() {
DocumentClass.test = 5;
}
}
}
does this apply to your code?
I have a class which extends the Sprite object in as3. I need to be able to override the transform.matrix setter in this class but haven't been successful in doing so.
I've tried many things, along with creating my own separate class which extends the Transform class and then overrides its set matrix function, and set my transform = new CustomTransform(). Sadly this didn't work.
In code this is what i tried:
public class MyClass extends Sprite
{
public function MyClass()
{
super(); transform = new MyTransform(this);
}
}
class MyTransform extends Transform
{
public function MyTransform(dp:DisplayObject)
{
super();
}
override public function set matrix(value:Matrix)
{
super.matrix = value;
customcode();
}
}
All help is greatly appreciated!
This seems to work:
public class MyClass extends Sprite
{
public function MyClass()
{
super();
transform = new MyTransform(this,super.transform);
// i'm drawing a rect just to see the results of scaling
graphics.beginFill(0xff0000);
graphics.drawRect(0,0,100,100);
graphics.endFill();
}
override public function get transform():Transform {
var tmp:Transform;
if(super.transform is MyTransform) {
tmp = super.transform;
} else {
tmp = new MyTransform(this,super.transform);
}
return tmp;
}
override public function set transform(value:Transform):void {
var tmp:Transform;
if(value is MyTransform) {
tmp = value;
} else {
tmp = new MyTransform(this,value);
}
super.transform = tmp;
}
}
public class MyTransform extends Transform
{
public function MyTransform(dp:DisplayObject,transf:Transform = null)
{
super(dp);
if(transf) {
for(var prop:String in transf) {
this[prop] = transf[prop];
}
}
}
override public function set matrix(value:Matrix):void
{
super.matrix = value;
// customcode();
}
}
Use:
var sp:MyClass = new MyClass();
var mat:Matrix = sp.transform.matrix;
mat.scale(3,3);
trace(sp.transform);
sp.transform.matrix = mat;
addChild(sp);
The problem is that, even if you create and assign your tranform to be of type MyTransform, the getter returns a regular Transform object. There's something weird about how transform objects work in Flash (this is also true for SoundTransform, for instance). There's some kind of cache mechanism implemented in a rather lame way that forces you to reassign the instance if you want to commit your changes.
I mean this pattern:
var t:Transform = mc.transform;
// do something with t
mc.transform = t;
So I think this is related to why your code doesn't work as expected.
To get around this, I'm checking both in the setter and the getter if the trasnform object passed is of type MyTransform. If it is, I use it as is. If it's not, I create a MyTransform object and copy all of the properties from the original Transform. It'd be nice if the Transform class had a clone method, but it doesn't, so I implemented this simple copy mechanism. Not sure if this doesn't mess up with some internal state in Transform (could be the case). I haven't tested it apart from applying a scale, once. You might want to do it, as there could be other side effects I'm not considering. Also, this is probably not the most performant. But I can't think of another way to have your matrix setter called.
Edit
Using a static/global dispatcher is not a good idea except you really need it to be global. Implementing IEventDispatcher, since you can't directly extend EventDispatcher, is what you want.
The code needed for that is a bit verbose, but it's a no-brainer anyway. All you need is having an internal instance of event dispatcher and implement the methods of the interface. In said methods, you forward the parameteres to the actual dispatcher.
public class MyTransform extends Transform implements IEventDispatcher
{
private var _dispatcher:EventDispatcher;
public function MyTransform(dp:DisplayObject,transf:Transform = null)
{
super(dp);
_dispatcher = new EventDispatcher(this);
if(transf) {
for(var prop:String in transf) {
this[prop] = transf[prop];
}
}
}
override public function set matrix(value:Matrix):void
{
super.matrix = value;
// customcode();
}
public function dispatchEvent(event:Event):Boolean {
return _dispatcher.dispatchEvent(event);
}
public function addEventListener(type:String,listener:Function,useCapture:Boolean = false, priority:int = 0, useWeakReference:Boolean = false):void {
_dispatcher.addEventListener(type,listener,useCapture,priority,useWeakReference);
}
public function removeEventListener(type:String,listener:Function,useCapture:Boolean = false):void {
_dispatcher.removeEventListener(type,listener,useCapture);
}
public function hasEventListener(type:String):Boolean {
return _dispatcher.hasEventListener(type);
}
public function willTrigger(type:String):Boolean {
return _dispatcher.willTrigger(type);
}
}