Feedback Needed: Sequence Running

[julianshapiro]

https://twitter.com/Shapiro/status/509831210068348928

Any thoughts before I release this? Any related workflow issues you guys commonly encounter?

[stephen]

In re twitter thread: would be awesome to be able to sequence parallel actions in this flow..

I'm imagining cases where you want to trigger multiple actors to do separate animations, then rejoin them into a main sequence of actions after.

Example:

- Trigger a calendar view fading in (seq)
- Triggering multiple calendar events fading into place, while sliding a panel in (distinct, parallel)
- Once all of that's done, trigger another some text (seq)
- ...

Following that train of thought, I imagine supporting sequential operations inside of a set of parallel ones could be useful in a complex set of animations, but perhaps that's asking for too many ponies 🐱

[julianshapiro]

Note to self: Look ahead to see if queue: false is being used in a call across the chain then inline that into the current complete callback and skip iterating over the next call.

[Rycochet]

The biggest issue with promises is that they don't exist on every browser so you'd need to also add a shim to use them, unlike something in velocity itself ;-)

The only thing I'd like to see on top of this is something like .velocity([{...}, {...}]) as well - basically something like this in the velocity arg checking - if (Array.isArray(properties) && $.Velocity.runSequence) return Velocity.runSequence(properties), this; - possibly with a bit of extra copying and checking so that the elements and options are copied/merged from the current call if they don't already exist within each step of the sequence.

Nesting sequences as @stephen suggest above would also be cool - might be easier if the above paragraph worked there'd be no need to code specifically for it, just set queue:true on all bar the last in the sub-sequence and you could nest to your heart's desire...

Damn but that would make loads of stuff I've done look neater and far easier to code :-P 👍

[julianshapiro]

Also, great point @Rycochet. It's worth considering implementing this into the standard syntax.

[julianshapiro]

This was insanely mind-racking to figure out how to implement, @stephen. But, it appears to work. And in just a few lines of coooode! Coming in the next release.

[Rycochet]

Love it (and converting things now) - my only comment is on the sequenceQueue option - I feel that it's on the wrong way around by looking at the previous line. It makes more sense to me to look at a line if there's no option on it then assume that nothing is going to happen after that line until it finishes, but this way I need to be looking at two separate lines to know what's going to happen.