as a I mentioned before - I am adding 5 pixels to the PDG while doing
the layout. Works in my case so far.

PS Strange, but includeInLayout=false & visible=false for the
component which is placed _after_ the PDG don't work for me. I am
changing the PDG height manually.

Cheers,
Smitri.


--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "jf317820" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Anyone have any other workarounds for this issue other than the
> subclass suggested on the bugs site?  I'll try anything at this point.
> 
> Thanks in advance.
> --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "mitek17" <mitek17@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Alex!
> > 
> > Thanks for the comments. At least we all know that it will be fixed
> > eventually.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Dmitri Girski.
> > 
> > 
> > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Harui" <aharui@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I just updated some info in the bug.  It is deferred because the
> Player
> > > has some issues that we can't easily workaround that prevent us from
> > > having guaranteed solution.  I added code for a temporary workaround
> > > that will hopefully work in 'more' cases but not all.
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > -Alex
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > ________________________________
> > > 
> > > From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> > > Behalf Of mitek17
> > > Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 8:51 PM
> > > To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: [flexcoders] Re: PrintDataGrid variablerowheight issue
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > Hooray! It is in the state of Deferred Closed. :(
> > > 
> > > PS I am just using a workaround - in the function which does a
> > > printing layout (e.g. showPrint() in SDK help) I do the following:
> > > 
> > > pdg_procedures.height +=5; 
> > > 
> > > This extra 5 pixels fix the problem.
> > > 
> > > Cheers,
> > > Dmitri.
> > > 
> > > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > , "jf317820" <jf317820@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > https://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/SDK-14174
> > > <https://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/SDK-14174> 
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


Reply via email to