You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It would make so much more sense if the developer doesn't have to make the same check that you have already made to prevent the playing of the animation.
I'm using code from your tutorial:
ActiveArea(
area: Rect.fromLTWH(
animationWidthThirds * 2,
0,
animationWidthThirds,
halfAnimationHeight,
),
guardComingFrom: ['deactivate'], //this helps to control the animation itself
animationName: 'image_tapped',
onAreaTapped: () { //makes no sense to call this function
print('Picture!'); //if you don't play the animation
},
),
I hope my suggestion makes sense and the outcome improves this awesome library!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
If you're saying I shouldn't fire onAreaTapped when the animation is guarded against then I agree with you. I should definitely do that. I'm tight on time now, so it'll be a while before I can get to this but I'll add it to my list.
Thanks for checking it out. I'll keep this open until I've updated the code.
It would make so much more sense if the developer doesn't have to make the same check that you have already made to prevent the playing of the animation.
I'm using code from your tutorial:
ActiveArea(
area: Rect.fromLTWH(
animationWidthThirds * 2,
0,
animationWidthThirds,
halfAnimationHeight,
),
guardComingFrom: ['deactivate'], //this helps to control the animation itself
animationName: 'image_tapped',
onAreaTapped: () { //makes no sense to call this function
print('Picture!'); //if you don't play the animation
},
),
I hope my suggestion makes sense and the outcome improves this awesome library!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: