kotlinlang #tornadofx

I just don't usually have that many mentions in a single channel first thing in the morning. I'm just too far west. It sure gets lonely in the evening out here. Almost no posts in the entire Kotlin slack. Then midnight hits and it starts exploding.

Ruckus

07/21/2017, 3:08 PM

@carlw Yeah, we have

then

to chain any `Animation`s into `SequentialTransition`s, and

and

to chain `Animation`s into `ParallelTransition`s. There are also convenience functions for animating position (

move

), rotation (

rotate

), scale (

scale

), and opacity (

fade

), as well as a

transform

helper that lets you do all of them at once. All those helpers work for `Node`s and `UIComponent`s.

👍 1

Ruckus

07/21/2017, 3:09 PM

I used those helpers a lot with the `ViewTransition`s 🙂

Ruckus

07/21/2017, 3:13 PM

Also,

then

and

and

also take `vararg`s, so instead of

t1.then(t2).then(t3).then(t4).play()

you could do

t1.then(t2, t3, t4).play()

, which has a very slight advantage that it only creates one

SequentialTransition

instead of 3 nested.

👍 1

Ruckus

07/21/2017, 3:19 PM

We could probably fix this by adding two functions like these.

-.kt

Ruckus

07/21/2017, 3:25 PM

@edvin Do you think it would be a good idea to add relative animation helpers? For example, a

moveBy

function that moves to the current location + an offset (instead of to an absolute destination like

move

)

Ruckus

07/21/2017, 3:26 PM

Also, I did notice the default interpolators for all those helpers is

EASE_BOTH

, which is different from JavaFX's default interpolator (

LINEAR

). Is that an issue?

carlw

07/21/2017, 4:01 PM

@Ruckus I like the t1.then(t2, t3, t4).play() call

edvin

07/21/2017, 4:18 PM

@Ruckus Absolutely, we could have moveBy, then perhaps moveLeft, moveRight, moveUp, moveDown to make it even sexier?

Ruckus

07/21/2017, 4:19 PM

That could be nice

edvin

07/21/2017, 4:19 PM

The chaining calls might be even nicer to use if they supported infix notation.

edvin

07/21/2017, 4:20 PM

r1.moveLeft(0.5seconds, 10) then r1.moveUp(0.5.seconds, 50)

Ruckus

07/21/2017, 4:21 PM

We could add those, but they couldn't have varargs or the

(Transition.() -> Unit)

builder extensions. But it would be sexy.

Ruckus

07/21/2017, 4:22 PM

I've been messing around with the SO question and came up with this fun:

Ruckus

07/21/2017, 4:22 PM

@User uploaded a file: Untitled

Untitled.kt

edvin

07/21/2017, 4:25 PM

Nice! Maybe we should have a nicer way to create a

Point2D

instance as well?

Ruckus

07/21/2017, 4:26 PM

p(Double, Double)

or do you have something else in mind?

edvin

07/21/2017, 4:27 PM

Maybe

1 b 1

, and it could support number instead of just

Double

edvin

07/21/2017, 4:28 PM

It would also be nice if we could create a

Point2D

based on a Nodes current position.

edvin

07/21/2017, 4:28 PM

But we might not need that if we have

moveBy

and friends.

Ruckus

07/21/2017, 4:29 PM

That's not a bad idea. Also maybe a

Point2D.b(Number): Point3D

as well so you could do

1 b 1 b 1

, though I'm not sure how useful that would be.

Ruckus

07/21/2017, 4:29 PM

Why

edvin

07/21/2017, 4:30 PM

I meant

- hehe.. sorry 🙂

edvin

07/21/2017, 4:30 PM

Too bad

by

is taken!

Ruckus

07/21/2017, 4:30 PM

Ah, that makes more sense 🙂

edvin

07/21/2017, 4:31 PM

Point2D.z(Number): Point3D

perhaps?