>as duration already included startDelay.
I did a simple test:
<s:Scale id="_scale" target="{box}" scaleXFrom="1.0" scaleXTo="2.0"
duration="5000" startDelay="5000"/>
And the total duration of the animation is 5000+5000;
So it seems that duration does not include startDelay.
Is that correct?
Maurice
-----Message d'origine-----
De : Justin Mclean [mailto:[email protected]]
Envoyé : lundi 16 décembre 2013 12:55
À : [email protected]
Objet : Interesting animation bug
Hi,
Here's a curious one:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-33974
>From what I can see there's a couple of bugs in there.
The most obvious one being:
public function get playheadTime():Number
{
- return _playheadTime + startDelay;
+ return _playheadTime;
}
And the other fix being updating _playheadTiem not being updated before the
start time of the animation:
// Keep starting animations unless our sorted lists return
// animations that start past the current time
if (animStartTime < Timeline.currentTime)
if (anim.playReversed)
anim.end();
else
anim.start();
else
+ anim._playheadTime = intervalTime;
break;
However with this change we get about 20 effect tests failing, mostly in repeat
count/repeat delay style tests. It looks to me like the repeat code was
previously incorrect as duration already included startDelay.
numRepeats += (_playheadTime - duration) / (duration + repeatDelay);
See the original playheadTime above. Anyone see something I've missed or are
the current tests possibly testing current incorrect behaviour?
Thanks,
Justin
