new to unity so please ignore if I sound stupid.
I have to scripts references in a script. Example, script A and B are referenced in script C.
I need to store script A and B variable names in a another variable so that I can use that variable in conditioning.
private FemalePlayerAnimations femalePlayerAnimations;
private MalePlayerAnimations malePlayerAnimations;
private Variable variable; // Got Problem Here
void Awake()
{
femalePlayerAnimations = GetComponent<FemalePlayerAnimations>();
malePlayerAnimations = GetComponent<MalePlayerAnimations>();
}
void Start()
{
if(1 + 1 = 2) // Some Condition
{
variable = femalePlayerAnimations;
}
else if(1 + 2 = 3) // Some Another Condition
{
variable = malePlayerAnimation;
}
}
Thanks in advance.
If I understand your question correctly, you'll need to use inheritence and have your male/female animations inherit from the same base class.
i.e.
public abstract class BasePlayerAnimator : MonoBehavior {}
public class MalePlayerAnimator : BasePlayerAnimator {}
public class FemalePlayerAnimator : BasePlayerAnimator {}
Real question though is why do you need two different classes for male/female animations? wouldn't a single class with 2 different instances cover your needs?
I have a feeling you don't simply want the name of the variable as a string.
The logic you are trying to implement here won't work. You can't have a variable that holds the FemalePlayerAnimations class hold a MalePlayerAnimations class.
You should reconsider the design of your program as you can have two different instances (prefabs) of the same theoratical PlayerAnimations class. This is how Animation Controllers work in Unity.
Alternatively you could use a boolean field to store states, for example: bool useFemaleAnimations that is changed in the conditions and implement the correct "script" where applicable.
Related
I'm a beginner learning dart from the book dart apprentice and I reached where they were discussing constructors in dart classes, the book was implying that constructors create instances of the class which I understood but I needed more info about constructors. So I googled and some results repeated what was already in the book about it being used to create instances of a class while others also showed that it's used to instantiate class properties, but my problem is with the other answer which I found that they are used to instantiate properties of a class, but my question is: I instantiate all class properties when I create the class by declaring the property variables, like this:
class UserClass{
userClassProperty = "";
anotherUserClassProperty = ""; }
why is the constructor also needed to instantiate class properties?
Often, values are unique to every class instance.
Consider the following example:
class Point {
final int x;
final int y;
const Point(this.x, this.y);
double get distanceToOrigin => sqrt(x * x + y * y);
}
If the x and y values were defined inside the class, it would be pretty useless. Instead, different Point objects can be instantiated with different values, which means the same code can be used for different situations.
Ok, so constructors instantiate or start a class by collecting all the data the class needs to start to start working. Constructors are so important that the dart compiler provides one even if you don't explicitly create one. For example, you create a class for mammals like this :
class Mammal{
String name = "cat";
int numberOfLegs = 2;
}
Although you don't explicitly add a constructor the dart compiler adds a default constructor like this :
class Mammal{
Mammal(); //This is added by dart during the class instantiation by default.
String name = "cat";
int numberOfLegs = 2;
}
Yeah, that's how crucial constructors are to the dart compiler.
And on the topic of why are they necessary even when you declare all the properties by yourself in the class, as hacker1024 said it would make the class pretty useless, as the point of the existence of classes is to create variants but with different properties. Not adding a constructor to your class and defining all the properties in the class would mean that your class doesn't take property arguments which in turn also means that different variants of your class can't be created. Again this goes directly against the point of the existence of dart classes. For example, you have a class like this :
class Mammals{
Strig name = "Human";
int numberOfLegs = 2;
bool hasFur = false;
}
final cat = Mammal();
final human = Mammal();
print(cat.numberOfLegs); //Prints 2
//2
print(human.numberOfLegs); //Also prints 2
//2
print(cat.hasFur);
// false
Yeah, this class is problematic. Cats with 2 legs? You would agree with me that that's not how things are in reality. And also the class is pretty useless in the sense that it's not modular, no matter which kind of mammal we create be it a cat, a sheep or even a cow the name property is going to be the default one we set, that is "Human". When we create a class to simulate mammals we want to be able to define what kind of properties it has, not use some fixed values. So you want to create a class which has a constructor like this :
class Mammals{
Mammals(String name,int noOfLegs, bool hasFur){
this.name = name;
this.noOfLegs = noOfLegs;
this.hasFur = hasFur;
}
String name = "";
int noOfLegs = 0;
bool hasFur = False;
}
final cat = Mammal("Cat", 4, True); //Now you can pass in the properties ou want.
final human = Mammal("Human", 2, false);
print(cat.name); //This prints the customized name of the object cat instead of some fixed value
//Cat
print(human.name); //This prints the customized name of the object human
Now we have two instances of the class with separate property values.
Although this adds a little more code, the modularity benefit is worth it.
Hi this is my first time making a question so hopefully i have done this right :)
In my code Im trying to make a Arraylist that is within a class that only holds floats so I made this: (some information is taken away to make it easier to read)
class object {
private ArrayList yc=new ArrayList<Float>();
private ArrayList xc=new ArrayList<Float>();
object(float xer,float yer,float rer){
xc.add(10.0);
x=xer;
y=yer;
r=rer;
}
void update(){
print(xc.get(0))
x=xc.get(0);
}
}
everything else except x=xc.get(0) works outside of the class this assignment works but inside the class it doesn't
hope this makes sense thanks.
It seems like when you initialised the variable xc you specified the type of the ArrayList to Float. However, when declaring xc, you did not specify the type.
When you try to assign variable x with xc.get(0), you are basically assigning any Object to variable x that was declared as a Float.
To solve this issue you can declare your variable xc specifying the type of the ArrayList: private ArrayList<Float> xc = new ArrayList<Float>();
Also, processing offers the helper class FloatList as well if this suits your program.
This should solve your issue, depending on the rest of your code.
I'm currently testing some simple AngelScript stuff, and noticed something I find a bit strange when it comes to how objects are initialized from classes.
Let's say I define a class like this:
class MyClass {
int i;
MyClass(int i) {
this.i = i;
}
}
I can create an object of this class by doing this:
MyClass obj = MyClass(5);
However it seems I can also create an object by doing this:
MyClass obj;
The problem here is that obj.i becomes a default value as it is undefined.
Additionally, adding a default constructor to my class and a print function call in each one reveals that when I do MyClass obj = MyClass(5); BOTH constructors are called, not just the one with the matching parameter. This seems risky to me, as it could initialize a lot of properties unnecessarily for this "ghost" instance.
I can avoid this double-initialization by using a handle, but this seems more like a work-around rather than a solution:
MyClass# obj = MyClass(5);
So my question sums up to:
Can I require a specific constructor to be called?
Can I prevent a default constructor from running?
What's the proper way to deal with required parameters when creating objects?
Mind that this is purely in the AngelScript script language, completely separate from the C++ code of the host application. The host is from 2010 and is not open-source, and my knowledge of their implementation is very limited, so if the issue lies there, I can't change it.
In order to declare class and send the value you choose to constructor try:
MyClass obj(5);
To prevent using default constructor create it and use:
.
MyClass()
{
abort("Trying to create uninitialized object of type that require init parameters");
}
or
{
exit(1);
}
or
{
assert(1>2,"Trying to create uninitialized object of type that require init parameters");
}
or
{
engine.Exit();
}
in case that any of those is working in you environment.
declaring the constructor as private seems not to work in AS, unlike other languages.
I'm trying to serialize data into / from my classes, derived from MonoBehaviour, which cannot be created from client code (e.g., with the new keyword), but rather must be created by a Unity3D-specific method, GameObject.AddComponent<T>(). How can I use the YamlDotNet framework to populate my classes with values without having to create an adapter for each one? Is there some sort of built-in adapter that I can configure, such that YamlDotNet doesn't instantiate the class it's trying to serialize to?
A typical file might contain a mapping of items, e.g.,
%YAML 1.1
%TAG !invt! _PathwaysEngine.Inventory.
%TAG !intf! _PathwaysEngine.Adventure.
---
Backpack_01: !invt!Item+yml
mass: 2
desc:
nouns: /^bag|(back)?pack|sack|container$/
description: |
Your backpack is only slightly worn, and...
rand_descriptions:
- "It's flaps twirl in the breeze."
- "You stare at it. You feel enriched."
MagLite_LR05: !invt!Lamp+yml
cost: 56
mass: 2
time: 5760
desc:
nouns: /^light|flashlight|maglite|lr_05$/
description: |
On the side of this flashlight is a label...
(Type "light" to turn it on and off.)
...
Where the tags are the fully specified class names of my Items, e.g., PathwaysEngine.Inventory.Lamp+yml, PathwaysEngine is the namespace I use for my game engine code, Inventory deals with items & whatnot, and Lamp+yml is how the compiler denotes a nested class, yml inside Lamp. Lamp+yml might look like this:
public partial class Lamp : Item, IWearable {
public new class yml : Item.yml {
public float time {get;set;}
public void Deserialize(Lamp o) {
base.Deserialize((Item) o);
o.time = time;
}
}
}
I call Deserialize() on all objects that derive from Thing from Awake(), i.e., once the MonoBehaviour classes exist in the game. Elsewhere, I've already created a pretty complicated Dictionary filled with objects of type Someclass+yml, and then Deserialize takes an instance of the real, runtime class Someclass and populates it with values. There's got to be a cleaner way to do this, right?
How can I:
Tell the Deserializer what my classes are?
See the second edit for a good solution for the above issue
Get the data without it attempting to create my MonoBehaviour-derived classes?
Edit: I've since worked at the problem, and have found out a good way of dealing with custom data (in my particular case of trying to parse regexes out of my data, and having them not be considered strings & therefore, un-castable to regex) is to use a IYamlTypeConverter for that particular string. Using YamlDotNet with Unity3D MonoBehaviours, however, is still an issue.
Another Edit: The above examples use a pretty ugly way of determining types. In my case, the best thing to do was to register the tags first with the deserializer, e.g.,
var pre = "tag:yaml.org,2002:";
var tags = new Dictionary<string,Type> {
{ "regex", typeof(Regex) },
{ "date", typeof(DateTime) },
{ "item", typeof(Item) }};
foreach (var tag in tags)
deserializer.RegisterTagMapping(
pre+tag.Key, tag.Value);
Then, I use the !!tag notation in the *.yml file, e.g.,
%YAML 1.1
---
Special Item: !!item
nouns: /thing|item|object/
someBoolean: true
Start Date: !!date 2015-12-17
some regex: !!regex /matches\s+whatever/
...
You can pass a custom implementation of IObjectFactory to the constructor of the Deserializer class. Every time the deserializer needs to create an instance of an object, it will use the IObjectFactory to create it.
Notice that your factory will be responsible for creating instances of every type that is deserialized. The easiest way to implement it is to create a decorator around DefaultObjectFactory, such as:
class UnityObjectFactory : IObjectFactory
{
private readonly DefaultObjectFactory DefaultFactory =
new DefaultObjectFactory();
public object Create(Type type)
{
// You can use specific types manually
if (type == typeof(MyCustomType))
{
return GameObject.AddComponent<MyCustomType>();
}
// Or use a marker interface
else if (typeof(IMyMarkerInterface).IsAssignableFrom(type))
{
return typeof(GameObject)
.GetMethod("AddComponent")
.MakeGenericMethod(type)
.Invoke();
}
// Delegate unknown types to the default factory
else
{
return DefaultFactory(type);
}
}
}
I'm new to unity and am having a bit of trouble getting my head around the architecture.
Lets say I have a C# script component called 'component A'.
I'd like component A to have an array of 100 other components of type 'component B'.
How do I construct the 'component B's programmatically with certain values?
Note that 'component B' is derived from 'MonoBehaviour' as it needs to be able to call 'StartCoroutine'
I'm aware that in unity you do not use constructors as you normally would in OO.
Note that 'component B' is derived from 'MonoBehaviour' as it needs to
be able to call 'StartCoroutine'
I'm aware that in unity you do not use constructors as you normally
would in OO.
That's true. A possibility is to istantiate components at runtime and provide a method to initialize them ( if initialization requires arguments, otherwise all initialization can be done inside Start or Awake methods ).
How do I construct the 'component B's programmatically with certain
values?
Here's a possible way:
public class BComponent : MonoBehavior
{
int id;
public void Init(int i)
{
id = i;
}
}
}
public class AComponent : MonoBehavior
{
private BComponent[] bs;
void Start()
{
bs = new BComponent[100];
for (int i=0; i < 100; ++i )
{
bs[i] = gameObject.AddComponent<BComponent>().Init(i);
}
}
}
Note that in the example above all components will be attached to the same GameObject, this might be not what you want. Eventually try to give more details.