Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Possible fix for #147 #259

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Jan 30, 2018
Merged

Possible fix for #147 #259

merged 2 commits into from Jan 30, 2018

Conversation

nicorichard
Copy link
Contributor

@nicorichard nicorichard commented Feb 9, 2017

  1. Animating as a single boolean doesn't make a ton of sense when it represents many animations that can start/finish before/after each other.

  2. The deck layout function can happen during the appear animation causing the card to be whatever size it was during the animation.
    a) One solution is to layout the deck after the appear animation
    b) Another is to stop multiple appear animations from happening by checking if we're animating already.

In reference to issues #147 #233

…represents many animations that can start/finish before/after each other.

2) The deck layout function can happen during the appear animation causing the card to be whatever size it was during the animation.
 a) One solution is to layout the deck after the appear animation
 b) Another is to stop multiple appear animations from happening by checking if we're animating already.
@Tykhonkov
Copy link
Contributor

Tykhonkov commented Aug 31, 2017

@CityTransit Hello, thank you for Pl, it's true a good thing, can you resolve conflict? And I will look at PL closer.

@rnkyr
Copy link
Contributor

rnkyr commented Jan 30, 2018

Hi, @CityTransit!
Sorry for long response.
I've tried few basic scenarios, and your solution seems to be working fine.
Thanks a lot for your help! It'll be released along with 4.3.2 version

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants