[Golist] Suggestions

[Carli]

Sorry wrong e-mail!!!

ciao

Op Fri, 27 Feb 2009 11:30:50 +0100 schreef Carli <carli at maximum.nl>:

> Ha mark,
>
> zie http://werkenbijstrukton.mxmm.com/n/24/MVO-balansschijf.html voor de  
> belansschijf...
>
> ik hoor je,
>
> Groet.
>
> Op Thu, 26 Feb 2009 16:01:03 +0100 schreef Moses Gunesch  
> <moses at goasap.org>:
>
>> Hey Jonathan, thank you for this great email!
>>
>> You know, it's something that wasn't at the forefront when I designed
>> Go, but has actually come up a good number of times since its release,
>> and I'm seeing more and more how important it really is. Go should be
>> easier to extend into more complex sequencers that can retain state
>> like a timeline, run forwards and backwards, and do random-access
>> jumps to any point along the way based on overall time.
>>
>> I think you're right that providing the ability to run backward would
>> be a good add for the core feature set. The Repeater class still feels
>> a little clunky to me and there's been some hints lately that it might
>> be causing memory issues. Let's all discuss how it could be improved.
>>
>> Your branch will also require comprehensive management of start-states
>> and retention of start-values, something that best done in tween
>> subclasses. (Don't forget that you can extend other open-source
>> packages like the Zaaz tween set, and/or design a custom manager
>> system for random-access timelining.)
>>
>> BTW: another guy on this list who's already attacked this challenge is
>> Robert Boyd. You can find his emails in the archives and might want to
>> rally forces with him on this project. I've also found some need for
>> this kind of thing and will be happy to jump in and help you guys
>> create a solid extension for "scrubbable" sequences.
>>
>> In general, I really appreciate this level of thought toward making Go
>> more univeral! Remember that over all Go is more of a proposal than a
>> product, so let's keep shaping it.
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> Moses
>>
>>
>>
>> On Feb 23, 2009, at 4:12 PM, Jonathan Culp wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everybody,
>>>
>>> I'm sorry if this has already been written about or discussed
>>> before. I just joined the list, so I don't have anyway of telling.
>>>
>>> I've been following GO off and on for while. When I downloaded the
>>> source and was really impressed with the modularity and clarity of
>>> thought that it was created with. However, I kept waiting for
>>> someone to write the perfect tweening class before I took used it on
>>> a commercial project.
>>>
>>> Mostly what I was waiting for was for someone to write a tween and
>>> tween sequence that could be easily reversed at any point. Long
>>> story short, I got some free time at work today and wanted to take a
>>> look at what would be involved in "rolling my own" tween class.
>>>
>>> Reversing an sequence was something I used to do in Fuse all the
>>> time, but havn't seen implemented (well) in a Tweening package since
>>> then. I don't mean to trivialize the difficulty involved with doing
>>> that. But in recent years I've had to resort to timeline based
>>> animations, in order to match the motion studies I get from
>>> designers at work, which often contain long or many stepped
>>> animation sequences. (I really hate the timeline)
>>>
>>> Having taken a look at the source code I was expecting to find some
>>> kind of support for this but it doesnt appear to be there. I know
>>> that repeater instances can be used to play an animation backwards,
>>> but it seems, only once its finished. In order for me to add
>>> immediate reverseable animation support, it looks like I would have
>>> to subclass LinearGo, Playable Base, and SequenceBase in order to
>>> make some heavy modifications to the behavior. Doing so would, I
>>> feel break the spirit of modularity and extenseability thats at the
>>> core of the GOEngine.
>>>
>>> Worse comes to worse, I will just subclass the core classes, but I
>>> wanted to know if anyone considered making this part of the basic
>>> functionality of the engine; is there an architectural reason that
>>> I'm not understanding? that makes it a bad idea to do so? If this
>>> one thing were addressed I really feel like GO would take off.
>>>
>>> Let me know what I can do to help
>>> -Jonathan Culp
>>>
>>> Access your email online and on the go with Windows Live Hotmail.
>>> Sign up today._______________________________________________
>>> GoList mailing list
>>> GoList at goasap.org
>>> http://goasap.org/mailman/listinfo/golist_goasap.org
>>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GoList mailing list
> GoList at goasap.org
> http://goasap.org/mailman/listinfo/golist_goasap.org