I'm new to AS3 and have been putting my code on the timeline and everything seems to be working fine (apart from the usual issues learning a language).
What I'm wondering is why so many threads say don't put code on the timeline? Can someone recommend some resources for me to get a good birdseye view of best practice programming in AS3 and why?
writing code in timeline can be quicker to start. writing proper code might take longer to setup but later when you want to make any changes or additions it is much easier and sensible. timeline code is hard to track down when the project gets complex.
Related
So, I was just wondering if anyone could give me a succinct answer on why exactly it's better to code mostly in an AS3 file as opposed to most on the timeline?
I've heard a lot of people answer questions with a cop-out "don't put so much code in your timeline". I've tried both ways and found some pros and cons on each, but it just seems silly to me for so many people to parrot the general good coding practice techniques.
Another thing about that is that a lot of times I'll be searching for help on coding, and people will give such complicated responses, and half the time I'll use little snippets of code as well as incorporate a small portion into my projects. Also, the AS3 API site also gives waaaay overcomplicated coding examples. Why do people do this? I could figure out some of my issues much more quickly if people just simplified the code examples.
Three good reasons not to put it on the timeline:
Your code will be stuck inside a binary file, not allowing you to use version control nor review changes to it.
You're going to hide code behind menus, making it hard to review in an instance. When it's all in one place you can easily refactor it, and change it.
By putting code on your timeline, you're making your code be dependent on the Animate compiler. (Animate is going to take your code and inject it into your document class using the undocumented function addFrameScript to make things work). The code isn't easy to migrate in this form, if you ever feel the need to re-code in another language.
Please use an IDE when coding. It will help prevent mistakes and even suggest ways to make your code simpler. (To name a few IDEs: FlashDevelop, VSCode, IntelliJ Idea Ultimate (paid).)
To clear up any confusion, writing code in an AS3 file instead of the timeline doesn't mean make things less organized or put code where it doesn't make sense to put it.
What you should be doing is creating a new AS3 file for every MovieClip that you need scripted, then going into the Symbol Properties of your movieclip and selecting Export for ActionScript and set the class name to your AS3 file. The runtime will automatically declare the instances in your file at compile time. What you can do is actually declare them yourself in the file, to have full completion capability in your IDE.
What I like doing is first setting the movieclip to export for actionscript, publishing my project, then opening the compiled swf using Free Flash Decompiler, and copy paste the generated class into a new AS3 file. (You'll want to only copy paste the class and generated instance variables.) Then you can code in your AS3 file with all the symbols contained within the MovieClip already referenced.
I am planning to create a game with the help of Flash CS3/AS3. This game will feature too many functions and lots of code. A 30-seconds demo alone I've been making here already has 5,000 lines of code, and will only get bigger and bigger as I make progress.
I'm planning on separating snippets of this code into separate as files, so I can embed them on the timeline using the include function, but before I proceed, I need to know: Is this considered a bad practice?
I mean, there will be a point in development where the code will become so huge, it might threaten the game's stability, or am I just paranoid and this is a perfectly normal way to address this issue. Pasting all the important functionality on the timeline and being done with it?
Your ActionScript code isn't going to affect your load time nearly as much as your assets. Any audio assets have to be embedded in your actionscript compile frame, which you can pick from your document properties.
If you're using library assets that are connected to AS Classes, the only place you can really practically defer loading is visual assets that are placed on stage later in the timeline, by not checking "compile on frame X" (whatever frame you selected as your compile frame). Timeline scripts are, as a rule, bad practice, so I assume that you're not using them.
include is also bad practice. I suspect it won't work like you want, but it also breaks compile-time error checking pretty hard.
I can't imagine needing 5000 lines of code for a demo that size, so you may want to revisit your design. Look for places you can reuse code (literally reuse the same code, not copy and paste it).
That's depend a lot if you are using OOP to develop or if you type your whole code in a procedural way. Having some codes drop on separate movieclip/sprite is not a bad thing, I even feel it's good! but that's true if each of them manage themself without depending. For example in a video game if you want to manage with script the animation of a specific monster, that's a great way to write the code inside his movieclip and make sure that his own script doesn't depend on others script.
I am just getting into object oriented programming, and I was wondering, is it okay to put some code on the timeline, like stop(); and mouseclick events for moving frames, or should all this be on separate files also? If they do belong in other files, how would I go about doing that?
MPO is that you should learn the tool as the tool. I think that the timeline is the very best part of Flash, and if you throw that away, you are making your life harder for no good reason. I think all tools have a "code way" and "some other" way to accomplish what they do, and the default of most developers is to assume that the code way demonstrates your skillz and that "the other way" is so obviously easy that it's not worth your time to learn it.
IME, nothing could be further from the truth. I have learned these "other ways" in several tools/language, and you pretty much always get more power and productivity out of knowing both, at the risk of having a significant fraction of your fellow developers looking down their noses at you because they assume that if you're really good at "the other way" that you are doing it because you can't code. For this reason, there are very few developers who truly understand the full depth and subtlety of the timeline, and there are almost none who will talk about how to do this well.
I actually develop scalable enterprise-level Flash applications using the timeline for clients whose stores you've almost certainly been in within the past couple of days, so I do have a fair amount of experience in this area. My rule of thumb is that stop() is ok if it is unimportant to the overall functioning of the program (it's a visual thing only). However, it gets tedious after a while to keep adding it, so when you get to where you're not under deadline pressure, you'll probably replace that at some point with a Class that uses addFrameScript to do the stop().
The best use for timeline code is when you need to synchronize things (for example, with a streaming sound, which has absolutely zero Actionscript handles to get hold of it). Generate a bubbling event at the precise point where the narrator is saying "click the thingamajig" and you've animated the cursor over the thingamajig. Then, in the AS code that controls the parent of the timeline with the streaming sound (or grandparent, or whatever--somewhere positioned to catch the event), you'd put the thingamjig into the toggled state (for example by changing the data model the thingamajig is responsible for displaying).
Very, very occasionally, I will use timeline code to do something more significant. One example is that a swf compiled by Flash Builder knows what color its stage is, but one compiled by Flash Pro does not, without reading the bytes of the swf. I have a Class that fades a graphic in that can only get the real stage color sometimes, depending on how it was compiled (I'm not goint through the mess of reading the bytes--that's frankly ridiculous). So, I just assume we're fading in from white or something close to it (which we are most of the time). For the rare case where it's not, I've noted in the ASDOCs for the Class that it's ok to just populate the color variable from the timeline rather than worry about how to get it in there through dependency injection. I view this as kind of a poor man's version of the Flash Components properties panel.
Hope that points you in the right direction :).
I think it depends on what you mean by is it okay. (no I am not Bill Clinton)
You'll be hard pressed to get a positive response on this as most of the community on SO are developers and generally are not huge fans of using the Flash IDE/Timeline coding.
That being said, I try to always remain open minded and do realize there's a place for the Flash IDE in creating motion graphics quickly, etc. There's nothing that says you should not code in the timeline, if you absolutely shouldn't do it, they wouldn't have made it possible.
The problem I think arises when you start working with other developers and have to figure out where they buried some code on the timeline within some movieclip that is affecting things. For small projects this isn't really an issue, getting into larger teams (3-5 devs at a time, maybe more) then being able to work independently and collaboratively becomes a challenge.
One last point since you say you're just learning OOP. AS3 is a great language, tons of fun, lots of features provided by the run-time so you can just jump past some of the nitty gritty in C/C++ etc. But the concept of the Timeline is unique to AS3. So if you learn to do everything based on the Timeline, then moving to say C++ or Java or C# or any other OOP will likely be that much more difficult. For now I wouldn't stress about this since you're just getting rolling, but just something to keep in your mind as you move forward.
Edit (response to Ms. Blankenship's good answer and comments from Mr. Mear)
I think there is some arrogance on the side of developers. I can speak for myself in saying I've generally not been a fan of WYSIWYG editors (except when I try to build them, then they're okay :).
A couple of reasons:
They have in my past experience been terrible (take Word or DreamWeaver's code output as examples, try to work on a site some mom and pop threw together in one of those apps and you'll start to hate it too).
If someone was able to get this completely right it would invalidate a lot of knowledge I've built up (so it gets me into a defensive stance, not an objectively valid reason, I know).
Working with bigger teams finding code is key + the code editor is bad (compared with any of the alternatives, Flash Builder [my tool of choice], FDT, FlashDevelop, IntelliJ [my friends' tool of choice]).
Coming from a OOP background that doesn't include anything similar to the Timeline and potentially moving back to those technologies. You have the choice to be great at 1 thing or good at 5 things what do you choose? (I'm vastly over simplifying but hopefully you get the gist). I learned to use Eclipse writing Java, I can use the same tool to write C++, C, PHP, etc. This isn't to say I actually always use Eclipse for everything (lately been using SublimeText a fair amount), but I like that it's always an option. As an aside I'm not an Eclipse "Pure Blood", I started off early on playing with Flash IDE and HTML/JS in Notepad, used Visual Studio for a bit, eventually got pushed into Eclipse but have taken a liking to it for the all in oneness.
Ultimately there are too many factors in this open ended situation to say that one solution is the end all be all. To explain with an analogy, if you were to build a birdhouse a hammer, some nails, and some wood are probably all you need. If instead you want to build your own human house you're going to need some different tools (probably including a hammer, some nails and wood).
Also a related SO post (re-hashes many of the same points):
Why not use Interface Builder
i have problem making quiz in as3, this is the code in AS2 for scoring,
i wonder how the code is in AS3, can anyone help me, thanks a lot.. :)
{
salah += 1;
if (jumlah_frame>=0) {
jumlah_frame--;
gotoAndStop(array_frame[jumlah_frame]);
}
if (jumlah_frame<0) {
gotoAndStop(12);
}
}
That is the translation for AS3.
My guess is that you didn't even try to compile this in AS3. There may be other bits of code surrounding this that would break the file as a whole or something, and the greater context established by the surrounding code may even break these lines; but these lines, without knowing how the variables were declared or the functions were defined, are perfectly valid syntax.
When you try to port something from one language to another, you really need to show some more effort to get it done on your own. If you don't know the language you're trying to port it to, then that's a VERY good time to learn, and the attempt to translate the code will be a very good programming excercise to help you learn that new language. But you really don't ever want to ask people on a forum like this to translate code from one language to another, unless you've put forth some real effort and are running into much more complicated, technical issues than anything in these lines of code.
I'm not trying to be mean, but you do need to be aware of this sort of thing in general, not just with regard to questions about porting and translation.
I plan to start web app development. (Html, Css and Php) I want to make a mafia wars style game for the web. Static graphics game is played using buttons.
Its would really just be a database to store stats and a bunch of buttons.
Would this be too hard for a complete beginner to web development to take on? Would javascript even be necessary for this?
Yes. It would be too hard for a COMPLETE beginner to take on. Where complete beginner = just learning to program. If you have some other background (General CS knowledge, Database experience) then you could probably do it.
JavaScript doesn't sound necessary for what you are describing.
I would suggest going through a couple tutorials on web application development so that you understand the basic concepts, and then decide whether you know enough to start building your game app. Here are a couple tutorials for various development environments:
http://webproject.scottgu.com/CSharp/HelloWorld/HelloWorld.aspx
http://www.eclipse.org/webtools/community/tutorials/BuildJ2EEWebApp/BuildJ2EEWebApp.html
http://download-llnw.oracle.com/javaee/1.4/tutorial/doc/WebApp.html
You should probably at least read through some of those to get an idea of what you should know.
Would this be too hard for a complete
beginner to take on?
I don't think so. The game hasn't been developed by a single developer, there is a team of developers behind it. That shouldn't be an issue anyway, however, it won't be that easy for a beginner to take on such website initially unless you have good understanding of various concepts including strong knowledge of the main language, javascript, html, etc.
Would java script even be necessary
for this?
Possibly. Facebook has its own implementation of javascript named FBJS (Facebook JavaScript), it is more or less similar to vanilla javascript. At some stage or the other, javascript is needed to build some dynamic pages and there are certain facebook-related stuff you will need to use javascript (FBJS) for.
JavaScript. Yes. However, it can be done without but it may hurt the game in the long run.
A project for a beginning? It depends how focus the programmer is. If you are using this project to learn, certainly a good place to start. However, if it is for long run serious project, I would reconsider after learning some of the basic of programming.
If you love the idea you have and want to run with it, you will learn a ton in the process. Just don't expect to have a working product in a week. Don't let feature-creep hit too hard either. Odds are you'll end up re-writing it once you have an idea of how the process goes over all. I did something similar a few years back over the course of a month and I was pretty pleased with everything I learned.
You can do it, with patience.