Thank you for sharing.

As your code example doesn't “do” anything, maybe the following change/addition to your could clarify it, for Signal newbees like me…:

public function init():void {
// functionality here…
trace('init');
frame.add(onFrame);
}

private function onFrame():void {
trace('onFrame');
}

Regards! / Jonas

Still, a nice addition to the panoply of alternatives, tanks og2t

I think you've missed the point – that or I'm being foolish!

The hypothesis is that there's a difference between adding an event listener using addEventListener, and triggering a method to be called in a frame script. The first necessitates the creation of an Event object, but there's no reason why the method called by the addFrameScript should create an event object. In which case, there ought to be a marginal saving between a loop created by addFrameScript over a loop created by addEventListener. As I say, it's a hypothesis. Joa Ebert's results cast doubt about it, but until a rigorous, isolated test can be done, and both the test and results agreed to be accurate, we can't really be sure.

Perhaps the confusion stems from the fact that I do in fact create an onEnterFrame listener in the EnterFrameDispatcher class? I do, because the [Frame] metadata tag works in such a way that the original class (Main) is inaccessible until the second frame. I have to wait for a frame to elapse before I can inject the frame Signal into the Main class. I add an ENTER_FRAME listener, then trigger nextFrame(). As soon as the onEnterFrame is triggered I remove that listener – it is not responsible for the loop.

The loop is in fact generated by the addFrameScript(0, frameMethod, 1, frameMethod) line, which attaches the frameMethod function to both frames in the 2-frame timeline (created by the [Frame] metadata tag), which I then play.

I need to make this clearer in the post, I think, to avoid this confusion. Thanks for the feedback!