Thank you for your reply, I've restructured my code a little bit and now I do have multiple handlers in my code but no longer get the error message about having to call looper.prepare() (which I tried calling without understanding exactly what it does and didn't get a nice result). Sorry if I left the details out, I spent some time restructuring my code and then was unable to get the same error message hence the vagueness.
I'm still interested in what might have caused the orignal message telling me to call looper.prepare() though and the logic behind it. Thanks, John Goche 2011/11/30 Kostya Vasilyev <[email protected]> > You can have as many handlers as needed, within reason. > > The work of dispatching messages to handlers is done by Looper, anyway. > > And that's where I think your original issue has its roots. > > Posting a more exact message than "I get an error saying I need to > > call prepare *or something* since I cannot have more than one > handler per thread *or something*." > > ( I am pretty sure what it is, but let's see the message first ) > > -- Kostya > > 30 ноября 2011 г. 16:35 пользователь John Goche < > [email protected]> написал: > > >> Also, why would it be better to have one handler than multiple handlers >> anyways >> given that in some situations multiple handlers can compile? >> >> >> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 1:32 PM, John Goche >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> >>> Thank you TreKing for your advice, >>> >>> But then in my handleMessage I would have to check with >>> >>> if (inst instance of Foo) >>> inst.foocallback(); >>> else if (inst instanceof Bar) >>> inst.barcallback(); >>> else if (...) >>> >>> or is there a neater solution, perhaps using polymorphism or a design >>> pattern of some sort >>> so that my handleMessage does not quickly turn into a mess? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> John Goche >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 11:02 PM, TreKing <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 3:46 PM, John Goche <[email protected] >>>> > wrote: >>>> >>>>> The number of sprites is indefinite (could vary in number) but each >>>>> needs to manage itself individually. On top of this the world has its >>>>> own handler to manage updates to itself. >>>>> >>>> >>>> You don't need separate handlers, you can pass the instance of the >>>> object that is being updated in the handler message, then use one single >>>> handler for the main thread. >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> TreKing <http://sites.google.com/site/rezmobileapps/treking> - Chicago >>>> transit tracking app for Android-powered devices >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "Android Developers" group. >>>> To post to this group, send email to >>>> [email protected] >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>> [email protected] >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Android Developers" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected] >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected] >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
