2 Replies Latest reply on Dec 10, 2008 11:46 PM by Newsgroup_User

    The Advantage; Benefit of lacking features?

    jeffery wright Level 1
      I thought this was yet another sick joke, but like all things with flash, what seems ridiculous is often how it's done.

      Why on earth, would anyone believe that not being able to make a Graphic symbol visible or invisible via a.s. is a swell thing?

      What possible benefit could conceivably be realised from restricting flash in this way? It is sureal.

      "Whew! Good thing I couldnt code a button to make that Graphic symbol do stuff!"

      Is this what goes throught the minds of Adobe dev's when cranking out constant new versions of this program?

      What then, accounts for this unbelievable shortcoming?
        • 1. Re: The Advantage; Benefit of lacking features?
          Level 7
          jeffery wright,

          > Is this what goes throught the minds of Adobe dev's when
          > cranking out constant new versions of this program?

          Huh? Graphic symbols aren't referenceable by ActionScript and never
          have been. On the contrary, movie clip symbols are. This is the status quo
          for as long as I can remember. There's nothing different about this
          standard practice in Flash CS4.

          > What then, accounts for this unbelievable shortcoming?

          Flash provides various types of symbols for various purposes. Button
          symbols make for quick, but basic buttons. Graphic symbols are locked
          in-step with their parent timelines, which makes them great for manual (as
          opposed to programmed) animation. They're also lightweight, which makes
          them a better choice than movie clips for still artwork. The timelines of
          movie clip symbols are independent of their parent timelines, which makes
          them good for nested animation, looping, and other tasks. Plus, movie clips
          support effects (drop shadow, etc.) and are programmable.

          To my thinking, your question is a bit like asking why a screwdriver
          doesn't hammer nails. If you need to do that, go for the hammer. It's the
          best tool for the job. If you need to tighten screws, go for a screwdriver.
          If you need to bend wires, grab the needle-nose pliers.

          Because of this rich and varied feature set, it's likely that Flash
          gives you at least one way to work around your issue. You might want to
          convert your graphic symbol to a movie clip, for exmple, or wrap it in one.
          If you're comfortable with programming, you might want to use the BitmapData
          class to program the very pixels of your graphic symbol.


          David Stiller
          Adobe Community Expert
          Dev blog, http://www.quip.net/blog/
          "Luck is the residue of good design."


          • 2. Re: The Advantage; Benefit of lacking features?
            Level 7
            Jeffrey,
            you don't fully understand how Flash works yet. Target Movie Clips - not
            Graphic symbols. This has been the Flash way for several versions (since
            Movie Clips were introduced in version 3 I believe).

            --
            Adobe Certified Expert
            www.keyframer.com
            www.mudbubble.com
            -----------------------------------
            (if you want to email me, don't look)
            -

            "jeffery wright" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
            news:ghpd2r$rab$1@forums.macromedia.com...
            >I thought this was yet another sick joke, but like all things with flash,
            >what
            > seems ridiculous is often how it's done.
            >
            > Why on earth, would anyone believe that not being able to make a Graphic
            > symbol visible or invisible via a.s. is a swell thing?
            >
            > What possible benefit could conceivably be realised from restricting flash
            > in
            > this way? It is sureal.
            >
            > "Whew! Good thing I couldnt code a button to make that Graphic symbol do
            > stuff!"
            >
            > Is this what goes throught the minds of Adobe dev's when cranking out
            > constant
            > new versions of this program?
            >
            > What then, accounts for this unbelievable shortcoming?
            >