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

Animations get skipped when old ones are stopped mid-tick #3503

Open
gibson042 opened this issue Jan 16, 2017 · 7 comments
Open

Animations get skipped when old ones are stopped mid-tick #3503

gibson042 opened this issue Jan 16, 2017 · 7 comments
Assignees
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@gibson042
Copy link
Member

@gibson042 gibson042 commented Jan 16, 2017

Description

Mutation of the timer list inside a timer callback can affect the timer index, resulting in skipped callbacks.

Link to test case

https://jsfiddle.net/2v6cyorf/4/

@gibson042 gibson042 added the Effects label Jan 16, 2017
@gibson042 gibson042 added this to the 3.2.0 milestone Jan 16, 2017
@gibson042 gibson042 self-assigned this Jan 16, 2017
gibson042 added a commit to gibson042/jquery that referenced this issue Jan 16, 2017
@gibson042 gibson042 closed this in 3c89329 Jan 16, 2017
@preethi26
Copy link

@preethi26 preethi26 commented Feb 5, 2017

@gibson042 ,
but is the animation 'C' of the test case not being skipped after the commit? I think even the #3497 has to be fixed for it to work. Is what I am assuming correct ?

@gibson042
Copy link
Member Author

@gibson042 gibson042 commented Feb 5, 2017

Good catch, @preethi26.

@gibson042 gibson042 reopened this Feb 5, 2017
@preethi26
Copy link

@preethi26 preethi26 commented Feb 5, 2017

@gibson042 ,
I really don't understand the difference between both the issues #3503 and #3497. Could you please clear it for me ?

@gibson042
Copy link
Member Author

@gibson042 gibson042 commented Feb 5, 2017

#3497 is more general, covering not just callback skips (#3503) but also double-callbacks of new animations. It was my intent to fix the former immediately, but the code doing so was lost somewhere along the development of PR #3496.

@preethi26
Copy link

@preethi26 preethi26 commented Feb 5, 2017

@gibson042, So shouldn't the fix for #3497 fix #3503? Is there any reason for them to be separate ?

@gibson042
Copy link
Member Author

@gibson042 gibson042 commented Feb 5, 2017

It's likely that they will now be fixed together.

@timmywil
Copy link
Member

@timmywil timmywil commented Mar 15, 2017

Pushing to 3.3.

@timmywil timmywil modified the milestones: 3.3.0, 3.2.0 Mar 15, 2017
@timmywil timmywil added the Bug label Mar 27, 2017
@timmywil timmywil modified the milestones: 3.3.0, 3.4.0 Jan 16, 2018
@timmywil timmywil modified the milestones: 3.4.0, 4.0.0 Sep 24, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet
3 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.