[MX] This one has really got me! - Reflecting load totals for multiple clips.

[pup100]

Hi,

What on the surface appeared to be an easy task has turned into a REAL mind bender!

I've got 3 clips being loaded into holding clips within a main clip.

What I want to do is give loading progress for the 3 clips as they are loaded in, so...... I have set up a loop to give me the “bytesLoaded” amount for each clip within an onEnterframe event

code:

---

_root.holdtext_mc.onEnterFrame = function() {

		for (i in _root.ticking_array) {//ticking_array holds references to the clips.

		eachLoad = (Math.floor((_root.ticking_array[i].getBytesLoaded()/1024)));

---

Now I've got no problem with the amounts being captured by “eachLoad” - 3 progressing totals correctly giving the amounts of each clip loading – Where it is all going tits up is how I can get a total for these 3 amounts reflected in a trace statement or text field.

It sounds simple but has got the better of me! I have tried to load them into an array, but my understanding is that you cannot easily update the parameter held in an array without removing it first so the code

code:

---

_root.holdtext_mc.onEnterFrame = function() {

		for (i in _root.ticking_array) {

			_root.tot_array.push(Math.floor((_root.ticking_arr  ay[i].getBytesLoaded()/1024)));

			

				

			}

---

will just stuff a new amount into a new position in the array

I have tried to use a variable to capture each amount & then add that to a variable keeping track of the total but at best this will give you an “Unnatural” block amount as the totals for all 3 clips are traced out – say first frame 34 next frame & trace statement 64 no single unit incrementation.

Any help please.

[nunomira]

What's wrong with

code:

---

_root.holdtext_mc.onEnterFrame = function()

{

	var total = 0;

	for (i in _root.ticking_array)

	{

		eachLoad = (Math.floor((_root.ticking_array[i].getBytesLoaded() / 1024)));

		total += eachLoad;

	}

	trace (total);

};

---

?

[pup100]

nunomira - I have just got my wife to hit me over the head with a frying pan!!!

Your code works like a dream!

In trying it the other day I had left an old irrelevant trace variable & so nothing was happening & took it that your kind example was not quite what i needed.

Of course you where right - some times one gets so wrapped up in a problem that you don't see the wood for the trees! or more apt the simple from the complicated.

I thank you once again sir!

[nunomira]

Those things don't happen only for those that don't code.


I'm glad it's solved.