On Sat, 2005-05-28 at 05:07 -0700, Chas wrote: > The question of which data-binding way to go is still > viable however, whether the TreeModel itself would be > 100% managed or not. If you have any additional input > on that, I'd be happy to hear. (As you said, both ways > are suboptimal, so I'm afraid maybe both ways would > have to supported to allow for different scenarios > with different requirements.) > > Anyway, thanks for your response - I'll reconsider; > indeed, maybe waiting with this till it's possible to > do it in 100% managed code would be a smarter move.
Oh, thats the best part of writing a managed TreeModel implementation. gtk+ would ask your TreeModel for the data, so you wouldn't have to do much else to get it to work. In fact, Vlad has written a DataTableModel that is all managed code that works using DataSet not ITypedList, if you look at the archives to this list, I am sure you can find it. --Todd _______________________________________________ Gtk-sharp-list maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/gtk-sharp-list
