[Sandy] Sandy 3.0 question

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

Well changing this parameter order isn't a good idea in my opinion...
Sounds very logical to me that the first parameter is the shape's name.
About the compatibility, I have changed the version number to show that
there's a major update here. So yes the code needs to be updated, but the
logic behind sandy is the same, I'm sure people will do it without any big
problems.

you just need to learn once again how the library works ;) We'll write a
tutorial that explains how to port the code.

++

2007/6/5, Collin Cusce <rafajafar at gmail.com>:
>
> Sure does. I'm sorry I'm going to have a lot of these questions as I
> familiarize myself with 3.0.
>
> I'd change the order of that parameter if for no other reason than it
> breaks
> 1.2 and most people assume it's null.
>
>
> On 6/5/07, kiroukou <thomas.pfeiffer at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Well you can let it to null, and this way the name will be the node ID.
> >
> > when you create a box you can do : new Box( "myBox", 5, 5, 5 );  or
> > new Box( null, 5, 5, 5 );
> >
> > Hope it answers your question
> > Thomas
> >
> > Le 5 juin 07 à 21:58, Collin Cusce a écrit :
> >
> > > Ah. Fast is good. Couldn't you just pass a reference to "this" to
> > > the super
> > > instead?
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Sandy mailing list
> > > Sandy at osflash.org
> > > http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/sandy_osflash.org
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sandy mailing list
> > Sandy at osflash.org
> > http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/sandy_osflash.org
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Sandy mailing list
> Sandy at osflash.org
> http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/sandy_osflash.org
>