Interactive Animations#35
Conversation
|
There are still some areas I need to explore on this. Top of mind right now:
|
1ab2ac8 to
b1f29c9
Compare
I think the easiest way to handle this would be to not support repeating interactive animations. Moving the source of truth for the repeat style to the execution phase (#43) would make this fairly straightforward, allowing us to simply exclude the If we then decide to add support for repeating interactive animations in the future, we could add a |
|
Ideas from chatting with @lukebradford a few weeks ago:
We also discussed what the expected behavior when the animation reaches the end, and landed on the animation not automatically completing when it hits the end of the animation. To avoid a permanent retain cycle if the animation is not explicitly ended, though, we talked about only holding onto the instance in the driver while it is in automatic mode. I think this solves most use cases (if you have a reference to the instance, you can control it still; if you don't, then it doesn't matter). The one thing I just thought of is the case of holding a weak reference to the instance. I think it's probably still a reasonable choice, but we'll need to be very clear in the documentation to avoid unexpected behavior. |
5249a19 to
a61f1a8
Compare
…urations, animate to any relative timestamp, and don't automatically complete at the end of the animation
This adds support for interactive animations.
Very much still a draft a this point. The exact requirements are still TBD (see #34). This is a proposal for one potential API, to give us something to play around with and see if it works well.