Yeah XD shitty example, need to sleep a bit, I will think on a better way
in a few hours.
El 04/02/2014 12:08, "Gama11" <notifications@github.com> escribió:

> In flixel/addons/display/FlxNestedSprite.hx:
>
> > @@ -400,7 +401,7 @@ class FlxNestedSprite extends FlxSprite
> >  		{
> >  			for (child in _children)
> >  			{
> > -				child.alpha *= alpha;
> > +				child.alpha = (child.alpha * alpha) / child._parentAlpha;
>
> Alright, that makes sense. It would be more intuitive if we had alpha and
> relativeAlpha htough... Btw, this example is a bit pointless
> numbers-wise, because dividing by 1 doesn't make any difference whatsoever.
> ;)
>
> Also, I think we'll run into trouble if any of the alpha values are 0:
>
> Parent --> child --> resulting alpha
> 0 --> 0.8 --> 0
> 0.5 --> 0 --> x
> x = (0 (current child alpha) * 0.5 (parent alpha)) / 0 (last parent alpha)
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub<https://github.com/HaxeFlixel/flixel-addons/pull/37/files#r9416955>
> .
>