I use the MVC programming model. I am running into a problem using Unity's hierarchy inspector. Say I have a Controller script: C_CardDrag. Now, because this drags a UI item thats nested several layers deep, it won't be readily apparenty that this C_CardDrag script is attached to an icon within in the card, and NOT the root object. You see what I mean in the image below (the blue highlight is where the C_Drag needs to be attached, NOT the top level object, otherwise the whole thing gets dragged when I only want the icon in the middle dragged).
I feel that it can be VERY confusing to design and name classes when they need to appear on nested objects.
Do you have any design practices I can follow to make script names clearer to where they are attached?
For example say I have a Tree object, and it has several brances. And lets say I have a C_Tree script, and a C_Branch script. How would you handle making it clear that C_Tree goes on a Tree, a TOP level object, where as C_Branch goes on a nested UI object?
Update:
Found a good resource here: Component based game engine design
Like any software that is being developed, you should only apply the appropriate Architectural and Design patterns that fit that project.
For example:
I was building a game that would be used for different devices. Although Unity lets you switch from Android to iOS seemingly easy. This game could be played completely differently on different devices, so I wen't with MVC.
Another game was built around Peer to Peer.
So overall you have a lot of options.
The way you can organize your files is by folders in the Project section of the Editor. I like to use something like this:
You will notice the Model is not in the Hierarchy. I don't use MonoBehaviours for models. In some cases, even the Controller could be non-MonoBehaviour code. That is why I prefer to have all the organization happen in the Project not the Hierarchy.
Related
In a project I am working with in Swift, I have a huge form that needs to be filled out. I found the best way to present the form was by combining many table views in a Modal Popover that takes over 75%ish of the screen. Using animation and a custom build Array of ViewControllers, I created something very similar to a Navigation Stack that never kept any views in it if they were data intensive by keeping them at the top or second to the top of the stack. It would push them onto the left or right side of the modal, all being done with a simple one liner outside of the Container Controller. Is this implementation bad to use for any reason? I feel like I might have bypassed a natural way of making this work without realizing it was an option.
My skills in Swift have been skyrocketing since I left my college in December, but I don't work directly with anyone more knowledgeable than me in Swift. This makes some of the more complex questions hard to answer without intense amounts of research. (which I am not opposed to if I can find an answer) I am expected to provide a quality working product in the end though, so I need to be assured that I am not making any mistakes that are at the backbone of my project.
I am working with flex for the last two years on some desktop apps. Until now I never had any performance related issues but today as we completed a mobile application for the iPad, I'm facing a challenge, the application is incredibly slow on the iPad.
http://i.stack.imgur.com/qkbWn.png
Slow, means that when I press a button in the menu to change the splitview I must wait something like 5s. Then scrolling is really slow two, with less than one fps and my TextInput starts to bug (the text is not in his box anymore).
I started to read a lot of blog post and presentation about optimisation for the mobile platform and then I rewrite some of the components I use. I removed the SkinnableContainer for instance and replaced it by a VGroup including some actionScript based drawing.
Now what you see is a VGroup (the dark grey one) containing some others VGroup (the group with title here) and then each widget is an HGroup with a label and a Widget. I only use Label and TextInput for the text.
Creation time is slow even (several seconds to create the view) for another page where there is only 4 text widget on it, or another one with only a list with a custom item renderer where each row is a set of 4 labels.
The whole things is cabled with RobotLegs, with nothing fancy, one models is injected in the view and at the beginning I set a member variable on the view with this object to bind my variables.
Frankly my thinking right now is : it smells fishy because if I've done everything right it is impossible to have such low performance and thinks that flex is competitive on the mobile platform. So right now I'm trying to disable the application piece by piece to try to locate what could slow it like that. I've got a couple suspects to check, for instance I've got some binding warning to check, and then see if robotlegs has got its share of the problem.
So my main question here is what do you think, and could you have some ideas about "is there a problem" and "how do we solve it".
Thanks
Run profiler for startup and separatelly for each operation that takes longed that it needs. Then prioritize the problems and try to solve them with basic optimization techniques.
Some problems you will not be able to solve fast - e.g. time for creating big components. The only option there is to rewrite those components with AS3 without MXML, styles and anything. I'm sure that flash.text.TextField is created many times faster than mx.controls.Label. The same for other components.
When component is created, it can be reused at a very low price. In your app there must be a lot of places where you recreate while you can reuse old components. It will save you memory and time.
Layouts tend to redraw even when it's not needed. If you have a lot of nested layouts, find the most critical places and replace a series of layouts with one custom layout or even component.
This all is very developer time consuming. At the end you will not get a smooth app anyway, but I believe that it can become usable.
This question arises because I want to capture LostFocusEvent from Dialog. Unfortunately, this event is not fired for non Component derived components. What I want to ask is what is the aim of Dialog not derived from Component, but RichWindow, as compared to the Swing library?
I think really the best way to get the answer is to contact Ingo Maier directly, but you may be able to deduce the some of the thinking behind from his blog article The scala.swing package in 2.8 and beyond:
Window hierarchy
This is how the Java AWT/Swing window hierarchy looks like:
While AWT's Frame and Dialog share the common base class Window, the Swing extensions have no subclass relationship or extend a common interface even though they share common functionality not present in AWT. In an attempt to straighten things up a little, we redesigned the window base hierarchy in scala.swing which now looks as follows:
[...]
This design lets us factor common wrapper code into class RichWindow.
So I am guessing that this is a deliberate design by the author stating that Windows are in fact not components in the same way frames and buttons are, and can be dropped on to other containers.
New to GWT here...
I'm using the UIBinder approach to layout an app, somewhat in the style of the GWT Mail sample. The app starts with a DockLayoutPanel added to RootLayoutPanel within the onModuleLoad() method. The DockLayoutPanel has a static North and a static South, using a custom center widget defined like:
public class BigLayoutWidget extends ResizeComposite {
...
}
This custom widget is laid out using BigLayoutWidget.ui.xml, which in turn consists of a TabLayoutPanel (3 tabs), the first of which contains a SplitLayoutPanel divided into WEST (Shortcuts.ui.xml) and CENTER (Workpanel.ui.xml). Shortcuts, in turn, consists of a StackLayoutPanel with 3 stacks, each defined in its own ui.xml file.
I want click events within one of Shortcuts' individual stacks to change the contents of Workpanel, but so far I've only been able to manipulate widgets within the same class. Using the simplest case, I can't get a button click w/in Shortcuts to clear the contents of Workpanel or make WorkPanel non-visible.
A few questions...
Is ResizeComposite the right type of class to extend for this? I'm following the approach from the Mail example for TopPanel, MailList, etc, so maybe not?
How can I make these clicks manipulate the contents of panels in which they do NOT reside?
Are listeners no longer recommended for handling events? I thought I saw somewhere during compilation that ClickHandlers are used these days, and the click listener "subscription" approach is being deprecated (I'm mostly using #UiHandler annotations)
Is there an easy way to get a handle to specific elements in my app/page? (Applying the "ID" field in the UI.XML file generates a deprecation warning). I'm looking for something like a document.getElementById() that get me a handle to specific elements. If that exists, how do I set the handle/ID on the element, and how can I then call that element by name/id?
Note that I have the layout itself pretty well nailed; it's the interaction from one ui.xml modularized panel to the next that I can't quite get.
Thanks in advance.
If you don't have a use for resizing events than just use Composite
What you want is what the GWT devs called message bus (implemented as HandlerManager). You can get a nice explanation in the widely discussed (for example, on the GWT Google Group, just search for 'mvp') presentation by Ray Ryan from Google I/O 2009 which can be found here. Basically, you "broadcast" an event on that message bus and then a Widget listening for that event gets the message and does its stuff.
Yep, *Handlers are the current way of handling events - the usage is basically the same so migration shouldn't be a problem (docs). They changed it so that they could introduce custom fields in the future, without breaking existing code.
If you've set an id for any DOM element (for Widgets I use someWidget.getElement().setId(id), usually in combination with DOM.createUniqueId()) you can get it via GWT.get(String id). You'll get then a RootPanel which you'll have to cast to the right Widget class - as you can see it can get a little 'hackish' (what if you change the type of the Widget by that id? Exceptions, or worse), so I'd recommend sticking with MVP (see the first point) and communicating via the message bus. Remember however, that sometimes it's also good to aggregate - not everything has to be handled via the message bus :)
Bottom line is I'd recommend embracing MVP (and History) as soon as possible - it makes GWT development much easier and less messy :) (I know from experience, that with time the code starts to look like a nightmare, if you don't divide it into presentation, view, etc.)
I have a set of nonGUI objects which have a one to one realtionship with GUI objects.
All events are routed through the top level window.
Many ( not all ) events occuring on the GUI object result in calling a method on the associated object.
Some methods in the NonGui objects which when called change the GUI objects.
One example would be some sort of game like Rogue with a modern GUI.
You have the area a player occupies in one turn ( call it a region )
and you have the object ( a button ) associated with it on the GUI.
Keep in mind it's only an analogy ( and not even the real problem ) and no analogy is perfect.
The question is, how does one design this sort of thing?
Since the button class is from a third party library, I cannot imbed a reference to the nonGUI object in it, though I can imbed a reference to the GUI object in the nonGUI object. So it looks likeI will have to create a map from a buttons to "regions" somewhere, but where do I put it? In the toplevel window? In the top level model?
Do IU spin off some sort of interface class?
Suggestions?
It would help if you mentioned your platform and language, but generally it sounds like you are describing Model-View-Controller.
Your "GUI" object(s) are the View. This is where you keep all the rendering logic for your user interface. User interactions with the View are handled by the Controller.
The Controller is a thin layer of event handles. User interaction calls methods on the Controller, which then routes them to the Model.
Your "non-GUI" object(s) are the Model. This is the object that contains business logic and whose state is ultimately updated by clicking buttons on your GUI.
You mention "embedding" references between the objects. This is not necessary as long as events in your GUI can be routed by some mechanism to your Controller. This design pattern is useful because it separates your UI logic from your business logic. You can "snap on" a new Views very easily because there is very little event wiring between the View and the controller.
The Wikipedia article has more information and links to implementation examples.
Waste a little time looking at Falcon's Eye (though it is Nethack rather than Rogue). There's a long history of skinning rogue like games (or command line apps in general), which isn't quite classic mvc - it already has a full UI, instead you're adding a decorator to that UI with either a direct translation, or another metaphor (such as gparted, the gnome partition editor, which allows construction of a sequence of partition editing commands by direct manipulation)