Comments on: Converting Strings To Booleans http://evolve.reintroducing.com/2008/03/25/tips-n-tricks/converting-strings-to-booleans/ Learn & Interact with the ActionScript World Sat, 22 Nov 2008 08:43:39 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: back http://evolve.reintroducing.com/2008/03/25/tips-n-tricks/converting-strings-to-booleans/#comment-736 back Thu, 05 Jun 2008 07:43:32 +0000 http://evolve.reintroducing.com/2008/03/25/tips-n-tricks/converting-strings-to-booleans/#comment-736 yes, sorry! yes, sorry!

]]> By: Matt Przybylski http://evolve.reintroducing.com/2008/03/25/tips-n-tricks/converting-strings-to-booleans/#comment-735 Matt Przybylski Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:37:32 +0000 http://evolve.reintroducing.com/2008/03/25/tips-n-tricks/converting-strings-to-booleans/#comment-735 did you mean to post this in the image slider comments? did you mean to post this in the image slider comments?

]]> By: back http://evolve.reintroducing.com/2008/03/25/tips-n-tricks/converting-strings-to-booleans/#comment-734 back Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:35:42 +0000 http://evolve.reintroducing.com/2008/03/25/tips-n-tricks/converting-strings-to-booleans/#comment-734 now it works! :) one question: is it possible to turn of the shadows over the images (who make the images in the background darker)? if you don't have images with a square shape, it looks strange with the shadows... i have seen that with "img.overlay._alpha" it is possible to turn off the shadows at the beginning. but when i click on the arrows and the images change, the shadows are again visible. now it works! :)

one question:

is it possible to turn of the shadows over the images (who make the images in the background darker)? if you don’t have images with a square shape, it looks strange with the shadows…

i have seen that with “img.overlay._alpha” it is possible to turn off the shadows at the beginning. but when i click on the arrows and the images change, the shadows are again visible.

]]> By: Matt Przybylski http://evolve.reintroducing.com/2008/03/25/tips-n-tricks/converting-strings-to-booleans/#comment-732 Matt Przybylski Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:12:24 +0000 http://evolve.reintroducing.com/2008/03/25/tips-n-tricks/converting-strings-to-booleans/#comment-732 back, just put that method in a class called StringUtils and you should be good to go. That's really all I have in that class so I didn't bother posting it. back,
just put that method in a class called StringUtils and you should be good to go. That’s really all I have in that class so I didn’t bother posting it.

]]> By: back http://evolve.reintroducing.com/2008/03/25/tips-n-tricks/converting-strings-to-booleans/#comment-730 back Wed, 04 Jun 2008 07:19:44 +0000 http://evolve.reintroducing.com/2008/03/25/tips-n-tricks/converting-strings-to-booleans/#comment-730 thank you for the information. and where can i get this utility class called StringUtils? thank you for the information. and where can i get this utility class called StringUtils?

]]> By: Matt Przybylski http://evolve.reintroducing.com/2008/03/25/tips-n-tricks/converting-strings-to-booleans/#comment-372 Matt Przybylski Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:55:30 +0000 http://evolve.reintroducing.com/2008/03/25/tips-n-tricks/converting-strings-to-booleans/#comment-372 Josh, Your enabled/separator vars work that way because you're testing against what you are bringing in from the XML, not grabbing what you brought in from the XML. your Boolean tests an expression not just pulls the Boolean value out of the XML. Make sense? Josh,
Your enabled/separator vars work that way because you’re testing against what you are bringing in from the XML, not grabbing what you brought in from the XML. your Boolean tests an expression not just pulls the Boolean value out of the XML. Make sense?

]]> By: Josh http://evolve.reintroducing.com/2008/03/25/tips-n-tricks/converting-strings-to-booleans/#comment-371 Josh Wed, 26 Mar 2008 11:07:01 +0000 http://evolve.reintroducing.com/2008/03/25/tips-n-tricks/converting-strings-to-booleans/#comment-371 Interesting. A while ago I created a context menu gallery and had my xml looking similar to yours. I had to pass in a boolean but did not have the problem you had. None the less I did not know that a boolean had a numerical representation. I am going to have to update my string util class :). Below is the xml I was using and a piece of my code so you can see how I called it in. Thinking about it maybe it has to do that I assigned a variable to the xml element instead of just trying to plug in String( item.attribute( "enabled" )[0] ) which would probably not work since I am casting as a string. [as] [/as] [as] var enabled:Boolean; var separator:Boolean; while( i < n ) { item = items[ i ]; enabled = String( item.attribute( "enabled" )[0] ) !== "false"; separator = String( item.attribute( "separator" )[0] ) !== "false"; createItem( caption, enabled, separator ); createData( item ); } [/as] Interesting. A while ago I created a context menu gallery and had my xml looking similar to yours. I had to pass in a boolean but did not have the problem you had. None the less I did not know that a boolean had a numerical representation. I am going to have to update my string util class :). Below is the xml I was using and a piece of my code so you can see how I called it in.

Thinking about it maybe it has to do that I assigned a variable to the xml element instead of just trying to plug in String( item.attribute( "enabled" )[0] ) which would probably not work since I am casting as a string.

PLAIN TEXT
Actionscript:

PLAIN TEXT
Actionscript:
  1. var enabled:Boolean;
  2. var separator:Boolean;
  3.  
  4. while(    i &lt;n )
  5. {
  6.     item = items[ i ];
  7.    
  8.     enabled = String( item.attribute( "enabled" )[0] ) !== "false";
  9.     separator = String( item.attribute( "separator" )[0] ) !== "false";
  10.    
  11.     createItem( caption, enabled, separator );
  12.     createData( item );
  13. }

]]>