[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re[2]: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performanc
From: |
Udo Giacomozzi |
Subject: |
Re[2]: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem) |
Date: |
Thu, 10 May 2007 09:50:37 +0200 |
Hello zou,
Thursday, May 10, 2007, 9:09:02 AM, you wrote:
zl> I am afraid still not enough, or even worse, a wrong direction.
zl> Zou: In the above case, I am sure "B" will be created and destroied when
jumping
zl> from frame4 to frame14! see testcase: action_execution_order_test6
Whoa, that's a quite complex testcase to verify this...
I added a timeline to the Wiki page, for easier reference:
http://www.gnashdev.org/wiki/index.php/TimelineControl#Skipping_frames
I created exactly the same movie. The sprite *definition* contains
this ActionScript code:
trace(this+' created in frame '+_parent._currentframe);
this.onUnload = function() {
trace(this+' removed in frame '+_parent._currentframe);
};
I placed three static instances at frames 3, 8, 13 with names "A", "B"
and "C" respectively.
When running the movie I get this output:
_level0.A created in frame 3
_level0.A removed in frame 14
_level0.C created in frame 14
_level0.C removed in frame 1
_level0.A created in frame 3
_level0.A removed in frame 14
_level0.C created in frame 14
_level0.C removed in frame 1
(in a loop, because movie loops back to first frame)
As you can see, no life sign from instance "B"...
Udo
- Re: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), (continued)
- Re: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), Sandro Santilli, 2007/05/08
- Re[2]: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), Udo Giacomozzi, 2007/05/08
- Re: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), Sandro Santilli, 2007/05/08
- Re[2]: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), Udo Giacomozzi, 2007/05/08
- Re: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), Sandro Santilli, 2007/05/08
- Re[2]: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), Udo Giacomozzi, 2007/05/08
- Re[3]: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), Udo Giacomozzi, 2007/05/08
- Re: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), zou lunkai, 2007/05/09
- Re: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), Sandro Santilli, 2007/05/09
- Re: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), zou lunkai, 2007/05/10
- Re[2]: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem),
Udo Giacomozzi <=
- Re: Re[2]: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), zou lunkai, 2007/05/10
- Re: Re[2]: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), zou lunkai, 2007/05/10
- Re[4]: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), Udo Giacomozzi, 2007/05/10
- Re: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), Sandro Santilli, 2007/05/10
- Re[2]: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), Udo Giacomozzi, 2007/05/10
- Re[3]: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), Udo Giacomozzi, 2007/05/10
- Re: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), Sandro Santilli, 2007/05/10
- Re[4]: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), Udo Giacomozzi, 2007/05/10
- Re: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), Sandro Santilli, 2007/05/10
- Re: Re[3]: [Gnash-dev] Re: gotoAndPlay bug in Gnash (was: Serious performance problem), zou lunkai, 2007/05/10