super_fan

sorry for my slow acknowledgement, but thanks for your ideas. the onUpdate callback method seems to do exactly what I need, so thanks a lot for that. I think you did a great job, given that you're having to try and second guess what was in my mind, but just to explain a little more, the fact that the effect is kind of low fidelity doesn't necessarily imply that there's not many positions. I had in mind an dot-matrix style display pretty much filling the screen width, so that gives enough positions that non-linear eases can still be seen as such. my slightly tweaked version... http://jsfiddle.net/5zRVz/2/ thanks again!

actually, now that I've checked those links and indeed it possible to do what I want with SteppedEase, it's not exactly the same as I was asking about. to use SteppedEase to do what I want, I need to know in advance how far I want to move - so I can then divide that by the number of pixels I want to jump to know what figure to use with SteppedEased. that's fine in most cases, but sometimes I might not know how far I'm moving, in which case I won't know what figure to use with SteppedEase. also, because that is already an ease, I take it it can't be used with any other eases - ie. it will always be a linear step with no acceleration/deceleration - which might not always be what is required. I think a tweak of roundProps that allowed a figure other than the default 1 would be more flexible. sorry to be so fussy! thanks.

I knew it must be in there somewhere; Jack thinks of everything! Many thanks for your prompt reply Carl.

apologies if this has already been covered somewhere, but I wonder if there's a way of tweening in stepped stages - ie. I have a dot-matrix style text area that I'd like to tween, but I'd like it to jump in 8 pixel steps. I know there's roundProps to round to non-fractional results, but is there a way (and if not, take this as a suggestion) to specify a number that it would be rounded to? thanks.

further experimentation reveals that the LiquidStage resize event handler is passing the following parameter to the function called... [Event type="resize" bubbles=false cancelable=false eventPhase=2] ...which I discovered with the following code: import gs.utils.*; function flagit(unknownparam){ trace(unknownparam) trace("resized"); } LiquidStage.init(this.stage, 550, 400); LiquidStage.pinObject(RectangleForBackground, LiquidStage.TOP_LEFT); LiquidStage.addEventListener(Event.RESIZE, flagit); so am I correct in thinking that so long as I include a parameter in the definition of the function I want to call, and then just ignore it, that's the best way of dealing with resize events? thanks.

elsewhere on the forum, Jack posted... ...and so I've been hoping to use that to trigger some code I found elsewhere on the web to fill the stage with a repeated bitmap as a background. however, one obviously has to learn to walk before they can run, and I'm having problems running even a basic test function from the resize listener, so if anyone point out what I'm overlooking in getting the following working, hopefully I can apply it to other functions and not have to bother anyone again. import gs.utils.*; function flagit(){ trace("resized"); } LiquidStage.init(this.stage, 550, 400); LiquidStage.pinObject(RectangleForBackground, LiquidStage.TOP_LEFT); LiquidStage.addEventListener(Event.RESIZE, flagit); the pinned object is just there to make sure that LiquidStage is actually doing something; it's the triggering of the flagit function when the stage is resized that's the important bit. this is the error I'm getting... thanks.

couldn't resist checking out the revised LiquidWrapper script before turning in and all seemed well, so tried it in a bit more depth this morning and I'm pleased to report that's made all the difference and it now respects the front/back depth set manually on the stage. many thanks for such a responsive fix. now if it could just rescale to the same aspect ratio but cropped on the stage rather than letterboxed (as suggested in an email I sent you), it will be perfect. thanks again!

thanks a lot for the prompt and helpful reply; I'll download the update and check it out in the morning. re: scale9 stuff, as I mentioned, I'm still experimenting - on some occasions it seemed okay, on others it was very definitely not working - but I'm going to continue checking it out to see exactly what I'm doing differently each time. either way, if I suss it out or not, I'll let you know. thanks and goodnight from UK.

first of all, I should point out that I've only been playing with this for a couple of hours since downloading it, so if I'm overlooking something that should be obvious, please excuse me. however... it appears that anything wrapped within LiquidWrapper is appended to the end of the display list, hence is always in front of other graphics on the stage, which obviously makes it useless for scaling any background graphics. like I say, it could be operator error and maybe I'm missing something, but if there are any workarounds, I'd much appreciate it. here's the code I'm using... import gs.utils.*; var wrapper:LiquidWrapper = new LiquidWrapper(OvalForBackground); LiquidStage.init(this.stage, 550, 400); LiquidStage.stretchObject(RectangleForBackground, LiquidStage.TOP_LEFT, LiquidStage.TOP_RIGHT, LiquidStage.BOTTOM_LEFT); LiquidStage.stretchObject(wrapper, LiquidStage.TOP_LEFT, LiquidStage.TOP_RIGHT, LiquidStage.BOTTOM_LEFT); where OvalForBackground and RectangleForBackground are movieclips on a layer beneath another movie clip on a foreground layer. but that movie clip is never seen as its hidden behind the one being scaled by LiquidWrapper. (I would attach the FLA so you can see exactly the setup, but attachment option tells me I can't upload FLAs) I'm also having a problem with consistency in using LiquidStage to scale a movie clip that's using 9-slice scaling - the 9-slice scaling not always working as expected when resized to the stage with LiquidStage, but I'm still experimenting with that and will have to make another post when I can explain it more thoroughly. I only mention it now in case it's a known problem that someone has already solved. thanks.