FlxShapeArrow overconstrained?

[Harold]

I was looking at FlxShapeArrow, and its constructor is

/**
 * Creates a line with an arrowhead on the end point
 *
 * @param	X				X location of the sprite canvas
 * @param	Y				Y location of the sprite canvas
 * @param	Start			starting point of the arrow
 * @param	End				ending point of the arrow (this is where the arrowhead is)
 * @param	ArrowSize		how big the arrow is (height)
 * @param	LineStyle_		line style for the line and arrowhead
 * @param	OutlineStyle_	line style for the outer line (optional)
 */
public function new(X:Float, Y:Float, Start:FlxPoint, End:FlxPoint, ArrowSize:Float, LineStyle_:LineStyle, ?OutlineStyle_:LineStyle)

It seems to me that the X and Y parameters are just there to keep consistency with FlxSprite, and aren't really useful. The Start and End parameters are given as offsets from X and Y, and the width/height of the sprite is worked out based on the difference between Start and End. This means that if the upper-left-most point is not at 0, 0, part of the arrow won't get drawn.

I was working on a prototype where I wanted to be able to drag the ends of arrows around, and the simplest way to do this seemed to be to wrap this class with another, that handles this adjustment automatically, i.e.

class Connection extends FlxShapeArrow
{
	public function new(Start:FlxPoint, End:FlxPoint, ArrowSize:Float, LineStyle_:LineStyle, ?OutlineStyle_:LineStyle)
	{
		super(0, 0, Start, End, ArrowSize, LineStyle_, OutlineStyle_);

		correctCoordinates();
	}

	public function setPoint(x:Float, y:Float)
	{
		x -= this.x;
		y -= this.y;
		point.set(x, y);

		correctCoordinates();
	}

	public function setPoint2(x:Float, y:Float)
	{
		x -= this.x;
		y -= this.y;
		point2.set(x, y);

		correctCoordinates();
	}

	private function correctCoordinates()
	{
		var minX:Float = Math.min(point.x, point2.x);
		x += minX;
		point.x -= minX;
		point2.x -= minX;

		var minY:Float = Math.min(point.y, point2.y);
		y += minY;
		point.y -= minY;
		point2.y -= minY;
	}
}

Is there any reason why the base version of the class doesn't work this way?

[RichardBray]

Hey Harold,

Yes, you are correct, the X and Y params are used for FlxSprite since FlxShapeArrow extends FlxShape which extends FlxSprite.

If I'm being completely honest my knowledge of the shapes in Flixel is a little rusty. Out of curiosity are you planning to move from shapes into your own custom sprites?

If you're able to check out the HaxeFlixel channel in the Haxe Discord server I feel like someone over there would be able to help out https://discord.gg/aZus3R

[Harold]

My prototype ended up moving away from using FlxShapeArrow, so it's not a serious concern. This was just my first foray into HaxeFlixel, and the design here didn't really make sense to me. Usually when that happens with a new technology, there's something fundamental I haven't properly understood. If this code looks good, though, then there's no problem :)

[RichardBray]

Fair enough, IMO I tend to draw simple sprites and use that instead of using the shapes provided by flixel (unless it's a simple box, FlxSprite is good for that).

But yeah welcome to the world of HaxwFlixel, if you have any more questions feel free to as them in the forum, or discord channel. The community here is small but really friendly.