dcsimg
A Flash Developer Resource Site

Page 13 of 18 FirstFirst ... 391011121314151617 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 260 of 354

Thread: Flash MX 2004 Released - TRIAL DOWNLOAD NOW AVAILABLE

  1. #241
    Developer
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    The Bluegrass State Will Flash For Food
    Posts
    3,789
    How do I convert my layer based movie to a screen / form based?

  2. #242
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Clogland
    Posts
    100
    Any chance this beast could have it's own sub-forum? So many questions, new features etc.

  3. #243
    Moderator CNO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    3,446
    Interesting article/op ed about product activation here:
    http://www.zdnet.com.au/newstech/ebu...0278422,00.htm

    On the topic of annoyances, Symantec recently announced that the latest version of its flagship Norton Antivirus software will include product activation as a mandatory install routine. Not to be outdone, Macromedia will be following the same path with Studio MX 2004. Product Activation is, of course, a marketer's term for compulsory registration, and it's something that annoys me a very great deal, primarily as I've yet to see evidence that consumers benefit in any way at all from it, and yet we're the ones who bear the burden of actually getting it up and working.
    Not to mention that we're paying for it.

    Thanks to JD from Macromedia for the link.

    BTW - does anyone have a write-up of the Seybold Keynote? I'm wondering if Macromedia kept completely quiet about this product launch there - I'd hate to think that they just screwed over this community.

  4. #244
    Retired SCORM Guru PAlexC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    1,387
    Well, I just logged on to Devnet, and you only get Flash Pro, so I can't really look at the differences between the two.

    I don't know what 144 MB you're talking about, must be tutorials or something, says 66 here.

    Unfortunately, I won't have a chance to test it out for awhile.
    "What really bugs me is that my mom had the audacity to call Flash Kit a bunch of 'inept jack-asses'." - sk8Krog
    ...and now I have tape all over my face.

  5. #245
    Retired SCORM Guru PAlexC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    1,387
    Originally posted by gSOLO_01
    DevNet Pro Subscribers should be able to download the new stuff already...
    Not until all the other DevNet Pro subscribers stop downloading everything.
    "What really bugs me is that my mom had the audacity to call Flash Kit a bunch of 'inept jack-asses'." - sk8Krog
    ...and now I have tape all over my face.

  6. #246
    Senior Member tonypa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    8,227
    Originally posted by PAlexC
    Well, I just logged on to Devnet, and you only get Flash Pro, so I can't really look at the differences between the two.
    Its same trial file for both, you can switch between Pro and Normal version any time while you use trial.

  7. #247
    Developer
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    The Bluegrass State Will Flash For Food
    Posts
    3,789
    Originally posted by PAlexC
    Not until all the other DevNet Pro subscribers stop downloading everything.
    Go download the trials. Plugin the serial that's on your subscription page.

  8. #248
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    California
    Posts
    149
    AH! WHEW!

  9. #249
    Senior Member FPChris's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    644
    Got the trial version. Not to sound like I'm complaining
    but here are just the standout things I've initially have
    issues with. I do think this is a fine release.

    The bad...

    Love the forms. But I think this and the slide show options
    should have been seperate products that create fla's. It could
    be that because they don't 'feel' like Flash it will take
    some getting used too. Might be ok in the long run.

    When you create an actionscript file it is put in its
    own tabbed window for easily going back and forth.
    Nice. However, the disabling/re-enabling of all toolbars
    across two monitors gets REAL annoying fast when your
    switching between a script and the movie.

    The extended effects editors are REAL SLOW on a 1.2 ghz AMD
    to the point of not even wanting to use them. They
    take FOREVER just to open and the controls for each
    are very poor. The need to click 'update' to preview every
    change is highly annoying. I can't see users paying for
    extendeded plug-ins that would perform like this.
    Not good and by far the worst new feature.
    Sad because this was a product option we were going to
    look into developing.

    I don't like that all the default component skins remind
    me of RealPlayer One. Yuk!

    Application development is still a tough sell without
    some real File IO functions. They won't get the VB and C++
    programmers until they do.

    I kind of liked having the Help in a broswer like in MX.
    Having it inside now is really cramping my screen space.
    Leading to...

    I'm now considering a third monitor.

    Chris
    http://www.**********-dms.com

  10. #250

    First attempt at AS2

    For those of you wanting to see more AS2 OOP samples, I put together a Node and Stack classes. (This is always my first project when learning new languages).

    File: Node.as
    code:

    class Node{
    private var data:Number;
    private var next:Node;

    public function Node(d:Number, n:Node){
    // no support for constructor/function overloading?
    // if the value is not supplied, then the variables are set as undefined
    this.data = d;
    this.next = n;
    }

    public function getData():Number{
    return this.data;
    }

    public function getNext():Node{
    return this.next;
    }

    public function setData(d:Number):Void{
    this.data = d;
    }

    public function setNext(n:Node):Void{
    this.next = n;
    }
    }



    File: Stack.as
    code:

    class Stack{
    private var head:Node;

    public function Stack(n:Node){
    // no support for constructor/function overloading?
    // if the value is not supplied, then the variables are set as undefined/null
    this.head = n;
    }

    public function push(n:Number):Void{
    if(this.head == null){
    this.head = new Node(n);
    }

    else {
    var tempNode = new Node(n);
    tempNode.setNext(this.head);
    this.head = tempNode;
    }
    }

    public function pop():Number{
    if(this.head == null){
    return null;
    }

    else {
    var tempNum:Number = this.head.getData();
    this.head = this.head.getNext();
    // garbage collection happens, no need to delete old Node
    return tempNum;
    }
    }
    }



    File: test.fla - in actions of first frame
    code:

    s = new Stack();

    for(i:Number = 0; i < 10; i++){
    s.push(i);
    }
    st = new String("N");
    s.push(st); // still works even though method requires a Number
    trace(s.pop());

    for(i = 0; i < 12; i++){
    trace(s.pop());
    }



    output:
    N
    9
    8
    7
    6
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    null
    null
    Notice that constructor/method overloading doesn't seem to be supported (at least I couldn't find a hack for it). Also, even though the Stack.push(n:Number) method requires a Number, it had no problems accepting a String. Garbage collection clean up the old Node's when nothing was referring to it.

    Node.as and Stack.as were in seperate files in the same directory as test.fla. There was no need to specify their location for compile into swf.

    j

  11. #251
    Here is the source from my previous post

  12. #252
    Developer
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    The Bluegrass State Will Flash For Food
    Posts
    3,789
    st:String = new String("N");

    Right? ...and shouldn't the objects be void also? Node():Void

    AS2 isn't going to be as complicated as some thought it would be.

  13. #253
    Originally posted by gSOLO_01
    st:String = new String("N");

    Right? ...and shouldn't the objects be void also? Node():Void

    AS2 isn't going to be as complicated as some thought it would be.

    I tried
    code:

    st:String = new String("N");


    but it errored, also

    code:

    public function Node(){...



    is the constructor, and therefore cannot return (even though returning void is exactly the same, it's typical OOP) So saying that it returns Void will produce an error

    j

  14. #254
    Senior Member FPChris's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    644
    Originally posted by gSOLO_01
    st:String = new String("N");

    Right? ...and shouldn't the objects be void also? Node():Void

    AS2 isn't going to be as complicated as some thought it would be.
    what's the point of new String ("N")? if you have to tell
    it the type to begin with? It seems like overkill.


    st:String = "N"; //why not this?

    Chris
    http://www.**********-dms.com

  15. #255
    Originally posted by FPChris
    what's the point of new String ("N")? if you have to tell
    it the type to begin with? It seems like overkill.


    st:String = "N"; //why not this?

    Chris
    in OOP the way to declare class instances is usually

    Type name = new Type(...);

    so, the AS2 translation would be
    st:String = new String("N");

    but AS2 is not very stringly typed, like when I pushed st, it wouldn't have worked id AS2 was stringly typed

    The reason why I did
    st = new String("N");

    was to show that it is indeed an instance of the String class and not a Number. The same would have happened if I did
    st = "N";

    I'm guessing. It was merely to enforce a point of how typed the language is.

    j

  16. #256
    Developer
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    The Bluegrass State Will Flash For Food
    Posts
    3,789
    Yea, it's just that I've seen in alot of the examples, things like...

    _obj:Object = new Object();
    _nbr:Number = new Number();
    _thg:Thing = new Thing();

    et cetera... it's not neccicary, but it's the correct syntax.

  17. #257
    Senior Member FPChris's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    644
    Thanks for clearing that up.

    Also is 'var' even needed now ins AS2?
    I've seen examples that use it
    with AS2. It would also seem pointless.

    I want to go with only AS2 and not some
    twisted mix with AS1.

    yasunobu13

    Type name = new Type(...); in C++ would make sense if
    you are declaring a pointer like:

    MyClass *MyTest = new MyClass();

    I can fully understand the need for the syntax here as
    the pointer type has to be declared properly as well as
    the object being allocated to it. I guess with the
    st:String = new String("N"); I was thinking of st as
    a variable not a pointer.

    The other thing I'll need to get used to is the type
    being closest to the equal sign. I can already see me
    mistaking a class name for the variable name out of habit.
    I suppose I get used to it.

    Chris
    http://www.**********-dms.com

  18. #258
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    126
    When creating methods and instances, the syntax is somewhat backwards compared to Java.

    for example this is how you would declare a method with a return value:
    Code:
    function myFunction(varName:varType):returnType{
       arguments;
       return thisValue;
    }
    and to instantiate your class you do it like this:

    Code:
    var instanceName:ClassName = new ClassName(constructor values);
    I have to admit that I'm liking this a LOT. With OOP, the sky's the limit as far as application programming. I spent about ten minutes playing with AS2.0 and then I placed my order.

  19. #259
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    71
    Didn't realize this but MX Pro won't run on Winodws Me?
    Damn. "This OS is not supported, read the release notes..."

    Well, I know I'm a dumbass for running ME, but jeeze. Guess I'll have to redo the hard drive and start fresh on 2K.

    Last edited by goose2000; 09-10-2003 at 07:37 PM.

  20. #260
    Originally posted by FPChris
    Thanks for clearing that up.

    Also is 'var' even needed now ins AS2?
    I've seen examples that use it
    with AS2. It would also seem pointless.

    I want to go with only AS2 and not some
    twisted mix with AS1.

    yasunobu13

    Type name = new Type(...); in C++ would make sense if
    you are declaring a pointer like:

    MyClass *MyTest = new MyClass();

    I can fully understand the need for the syntax here as
    the pointer type has to be declared properly as well as
    the object being allocated to it. I guess with the
    st:String = new String("N"); I was thinking of st as
    a variable not a pointer.

    The other thing I'll need to get used to is the type
    being closest to the equal sign. I can already see me
    mistaking a class name for the variable name out of habit.
    I suppose I get used to it.

    Chris
    technically, var wasn't needed in MX, it just allowed for some sort of garbage collection at the end of the function.

    'MyClass *MyTest = new MyClass();'

    Here MyTest is a pointer to an instance of the class. That's the more important part, is that st isn't a variable, but instead is an instance of the String class.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width

HTML5 Development Center