Qt Kinetic + Plasma Call For Ideas / Project Plan

[Akmanalp, Mehmet A]

2009/5/29 Ivan Čukić <ivan.cukic at gmail.com>:
> This starts to look like something. But I would propose an addition.
> 1 - that add returns a reference to the Animation object so that the following
> is possible:
>     b.add(animator.blur(...))
>       .add(animator.bounce(...))
> or with << operator (like QList...)
>     b << animator.blur(...)
>        << animator.bounce(...)
Either is possible.

> 2 - to have static 'constructors' Animation::series(item) and
> Animation::parallel(item), or, even better, just to have the Animation::Type
> enum (Parallel, Serial) passed to the constructor
>     Animation a(item, Animation::Parallel)
Sure, this works too.

> A bit modified Aaron's way
>
>   Animation b(item2, Animation::Parallel);
>      b << animator.blur(0.8)
>         << animator.bounce(4);
>   Animation a(item);
>      a << animator.fadeIn()
>         << b
>         << animator.pause(10);
>         << animator.fadeOut();
>   a.run(250);
>
> Or my way:
>
>   Animation b(item2, Animation::Parallel);
>      b << animator.blur(0.8)
>         << animator.bounce(4);
>   Animation a(item);
>      a << animator.fadeIn()
>         << (
>                 Animation(item2, Animation::Parallel)
>                        << animator.blur(0.8)
>                        << animator.bounce(4);
>         )
>         << animator.pause(10);
>         << animator.fadeOut();
>   a.run(250);

Well, all you're doing here is instead of dumping it in b and using b
later, you're explicitly defining it inline. This is fine, although if
we decide to return references (the . way) instead of using the <<
operator, would we be able to group stuff in parentheses like you did?
Anyway, like Aaron says, this is 2nd priority so we have time to
decide.

-- 
~ mali (http://constant.inople.net/)