Try anglelerp from lucid's math plugin - it always lerps to the smallest angle difference, even if you cross the 0� barrier.

Sent you a pm.

But everything is in there. Just adapt it to your project. For every mirror create an out-beam just like I did in the example, just keep track of the id.

Just enumerate the mirrors and out-beams and instead of my "Start of layout" event, use a trigger to create mirror and out beam.

And instead of just setting the mirror values, use a "for each mirror"-loop.

Hope this will help you :)

mirrorbeams.cap

Sure, I'll do my best :)

I might misunderstand something here, but from what you posted from your events, it is normal behavior.

You are setting the global 'BookCount' to the value of the private 'BookCount' of Text_BooksIndicator at every tick.

So whatever you add to the global in the collision event, the value will be replaced by the value of the private variable right afterwards. It will keep its value for just one tick (which you won't notice)

Example

Text_BooksIndicator('BookCount') = 0

global('BookCount') = 0

Tick 120

Collision event, global set to 1

Tick 121

global set to Text_BooksIndicator('BookCount') = 0

I'm not debating on principles, I'm just giving a hint to those who wonder, why Flash isn't dying as fast as they thought.

You can either accept the facts, or ignore them. I didn't say anything against the future of HTML5, I rather said, that it will have success. I'm talking about the current situation as a hint to why Flash is in the lead right now.

And why do you accuse me for showing sources? I even didn't use the higher ones (some see over 55% of XP). But at least I showed them. For example, Ashley stated that over 50% of the browsers are Firefox and Chrome, but he did not provide any source.

The W3Schools' stats aren't saying much. They were collected only from the users of that site:

<font size="2">"W3Schools is a website for people with an interest for web technologies. These people are more interested in using alternative browsers than the average user. The average user tends to the browser that comes preinstalled with their computer, and do not seek out other browser alternatives.

These facts indicate that the browser figures above are not 100% realistic. Other web sites have statistics showing that Internet Explorer is a more popular browser.

Anyway, our data, collected from W3Schools' log-files, over many years, clearly shows the long and medium-term trends."</font>

The W3counter link is a better one, having a lot of different sites in surveillance. And it shows the same, what I pointed to: A high user base with WinXP.

Statcounter again shows that large WinXP user base. It is a difference, if you use IE with Win7 (IE9+) or WinXP (IE8-). And it is a difference, if one uses Firefox with Win7 (hardware-acceleration support) or with WinXP (no support).

So, thanks for those links, they confirm that there is still a large user base that has no hardware-acceleration support and therefore will prefer Flash.

Again: it is the current situation. It has nothing to do with the future or the quality of HTML5 or C2 or Ashley's hard work to establish a really good game maker for that market! It is just the answer to those who wonder, why Flash is still so popular. As I said in a previous post: It will slowly change over time. It is not a matter of "if", but "when".

Where are you getting your figures for "a minority" from?From the sources I provided. If you follow the links, you can see them for yourself :)

Over 50% of the web is Firefox or Chrome which both support WebGL with fallback to hardware-accelerated 2D canvases.That are two points, that are not quite correct. Firefox and Chrome make 41%, while Explorer makes 52%. And you forgot again to see the fact, that 47% of the computers still use WinXP (Vista and 7 combined make less, 45%, Win 7 alone only 37%), so no hardware support for those, if they are using Firefox or IE. Chrome just makes 19% overall, and we know that those 19% are NOT only using WinXP, but Win 7, too. Let's say, it's half of them (I doubt it). That would still be around 39% of users who don't have hardware acceleration support.

source

Of IE, 10% is now IE9 with hardware-accelerated 2D canvas. Obviously IE8 and earlier aren't supported, but the browsers which don't have hardware-accelerated HTML5 gaming are now in the minority!See above. While it's true that Firefox and IE do support hardware acceleration, it isn't available for those, who still use WinXP, which is at least 39% of all web users. That's what I meant with "underestimated".

There's nothing, one could do about it. As time goes by, the huge base of 47% WinXP as operating system will shrink. But I'm absolutely sure, that's one reason for HTML5 not becoming as fast the successor to Flash as was hoped.

When everyone says that Flash dies and it's Html5 days,

what I can see is Flash ads/games still everywhere and Html5 is struggling with cross-browser problems(eg. audio/video), furthermore, big Html5 game company shutdown.

http://www.insidemobileapps.com/2012/01/09/moblyngs-shutdown-enthusiasm-for-html5-gaming-is-still-a-little-premature/

There's a point here, that I think is totally underestimated. People don't care about the technology or the platform, they just want to play. And when they play, they prefer to have a good gaming experience. I know that sounds so obvious, but here are some facts.

1) 47% of all desktop computers use Windows XP as operating system

source

2) The leading web browser versions are Internet Explorer 8 with 28% and Firefox 8 with 12%

source

So, there's only a minority that makes use of hardware-accelerated HTML5 canvas. 28% can't play at all, and for the rest it is terribly slow (<10fps).

On the other hand there's Flash. Constant 30 fps even on an older cpu (and with IE8).

As long as those numbers don't change significantly, I wouldn't hesitate to predict, who's winning. And even Ashley can't do magic. If HTML5 isn't hardware-accelerated on the majority of browser/operating system combinations, it is too slow compared to Flash, to have any success for now. It will change slowly over time, when more and more people will go from XP to 7, but that's a process that will endure a few years.

Does that mean that any "On trigger" condition are effectively placed at the top of the event sheet, since you said their location doesn't matter in the event sheet?

It means that it isn't any more effective than placing them at the end of the event sheet, or somewhere in between. It simply doesn't matter. They will be executed as soon as the trigger is true. (just like "Start of layout" gets executed before anything else, even if you place it at the end of an embedded event sheet, that you embed at the end of your actual event sheet)

<img src="http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/funny-pictures-gif-cat-stand-squat.gif" border="0" />

Oh my gosh, Garfield lives! <img src="smileys/smiley4.gif" border="0" align="middle" />

So using this, it would be possible for a player to select a resolution from this list, and the game update its display to reflect that decision?

It is possible to develop exactly that, yes. But the provided script just does the first, most important step for you: It lists resolutions that you can be sure of to be supported as fullscreen modes. All you have to do is this:

1) Offer the player the list to choose one of the resolutions.

2) Set the window to this resolution.

3) Switch fullscreen on.

Of course, you still have to decide what to do with the layout (stretching, black bars, zooming, etc.)

But without that list, you couldn't offer different fullscreen modes at all (apart from the current desktop resolution). So, the most important part is ready to go, but you still have to program all the details.