Re: Is kCAOnOrderOut too good to be true?
Re: Is kCAOnOrderOut too good to be true?
- Subject: Re: Is kCAOnOrderOut too good to be true?
- From: Steven Degutis <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 14:52:21 -0500
Not yet; still asking everyone I know and hoping a Core Animation wizard
comes across this thread.
-Steven
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Jon Buffington <email@hidden>wrote:
> Steven,
>
> Did you ever find a solution to the kCAOnOrderOut animation problem? I was
> frustrated by this problem in the past but gave up as the animation was
> optional.
>
> Regards,
> Jon
>
> On Mar 6, 2010, at 11:01 PM, Steven Degutis wrote:
>
> > This seems to suggest that the presentation layer has something to do
> with
> > solving this issue, if it can be solved at all (and I'm hopeful that it
> can;
> > I doubt Apple would have created kCAOnOrderOut solely to be broken from
> the
> > start, and never fix it).
> >
> > But from everyone I've talked to, no one has a clue how to make the
> > animation given for the kCAOnOrderOut key actually animate visibly on
> > screen, either before the layer has been removed from its superlayer, or
> > afterwards, once -removeFromSuperlayer has been called.
> >
> > If anyone can provide a solution to actually showing the animation
> returned
> > given kCAOnOrderOut, it would be appreciated.
> >
> > -Steven
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Kyle Sluder <email@hidden>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 3:08 PM, Steven Degutis <
> email@hidden>
> >> wrote:
> >>> I've been reading the docs for Core Animation, specifically about
> >>> layer-actions, and it mentions a constant called kCAOnOrderOut which is
> >>> supposedly called when your layer is removed from its superlayer (or
> >>> hidden). However, if it's removed from superlayer, the animation
> returned
> >>> for the kCAOnOrderOut event is apparently ignored, because the layer is
> >>> removed immediately, instead of when the animation finishes. The docs
> >>> practically declare that this is meant for animations. So, what gives?
> Is
> >>> this too good to be true? Do I need to use the workaround of adding the
> >>> animation, and in the didStop delegate, removing the layer myself? Code
> >>> would be so much cleaner if just calling -removeFromSuperlayer would
> >> invoke
> >>> the animation for me and then remove it itself...
> >>
> >> Isn't this an artifact of dealing with the model layer? I would expect
> >> that as far as my code is concerned, the sublayer is removed from its
> >> parent layer immediately, because I'm only dealing with the model
> >> layer tree, not the presentation layer tree.
> >>
> >> --Kyle Sluder
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Steven Degutis
> > http://www.thoughtfultree.com/
> > http://www.degutis.org/
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> > Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
> >
> > Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
> > Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com
> >
> > Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
> >
> >
> > This email sent to email@hidden
>
>
--
Steven Degutis
http://www.thoughtfultree.com/
http://www.degutis.org/
_______________________________________________
Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden