[flexcoders] Re: How to compose a super tree item renderer using TreeItemRenderer and others
Fine. Can you just show me a simple example of how to Just add the label when you subclass. Real code is most convincing and helpful to me. And you blog is cool, but it just seems not so easy to dig up the specific snippet I need in a short time. Thank you again. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Alex Harui [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are no hard rules here. I'm a code minimalist and don't like adding layers of code and display object parents unless it is really important. Adding one child is not worthy of another layer IMHO, so I'd just subclass, and I don't see why such a subclass wouldn't be reusable. See the examples on my blog (blogs.adobe.com/aharui). The more stuff you add, the slower things get and more memory they take. MXML is convenient, but not as efficient. It's up to you. If you do composite, the trick should be propagating the data object from the container to the children. Also, you should never call addChild in a constructor. We have a component lifecycle documented for performance reasons.
RE: [flexcoders] Re: How to compose a super tree item renderer using TreeItemRenderer and others
Sorry, I don't have time to customize an example for you. I recommend looking at the differences between ListItemRenderer and TreeItemRenderer as a start. From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of an0one Sent: Friday, June 20, 2008 8:59 PM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: [flexcoders] Re: How to compose a super tree item renderer using TreeItemRenderer and others Fine. Can you just show me a simple example of how to Just add the label when you subclass. Real code is most convincing and helpful to me. And you blog is cool, but it just seems not so easy to dig up the specific snippet I need in a short time. Thank you again. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com , Alex Harui [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are no hard rules here. I'm a code minimalist and don't like adding layers of code and display object parents unless it is really important. Adding one child is not worthy of another layer IMHO, so I'd just subclass, and I don't see why such a subclass wouldn't be reusable. See the examples on my blog (blogs.adobe.com/aharui). The more stuff you add, the slower things get and more memory they take. MXML is convenient, but not as efficient. It's up to you. If you do composite, the trick should be propagating the data object from the container to the children. Also, you should never call addChild in a constructor. We have a component lifecycle documented for performance reasons.
[flexcoders] Re: How to compose a super tree item renderer using TreeItemRenderer and others
Do you mean defining a subclass of TreeItemRenderer and calling addChild() in its constructor? Then it seems not easy to position and resize the embeded controls intuitively. What's worse, this subclass is of course hard to reuse. And I just gave a simplified case. What if I want a super tree item renderer consisting of a ItemRendererA, a ItemRendererB, a ControlA, a ControlB, a ControlC ... ? Don't you think it is much more convenient and elegant to combine all these controls and standard item renderers in one container using mxml than to write a item renderer subclass in AS and fill it with all these stuffs as if it is a container? (You should notice I have no hard logic to code here, but just a little layout composition to build and data bindings to make.) Now that we have mxml as a nice layout framework, why don't we make it better and let developers combine all the available elements on it to build whatever they can imagine at will? --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Alex Harui [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why composite? Just add the label when you subclass.
RE: [flexcoders] Re: How to compose a super tree item renderer using TreeItemRenderer and others
There are no hard rules here. I'm a code minimalist and don't like adding layers of code and display object parents unless it is really important. Adding one child is not worthy of another layer IMHO, so I'd just subclass, and I don't see why such a subclass wouldn't be reusable. See the examples on my blog (blogs.adobe.com/aharui). The more stuff you add, the slower things get and more memory they take. MXML is convenient, but not as efficient. It's up to you. If you do composite, the trick should be propagating the data object from the container to the children. Also, you should never call addChild in a constructor. We have a component lifecycle documented for performance reasons. From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of an0one Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 6:45 AM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: [flexcoders] Re: How to compose a super tree item renderer using TreeItemRenderer and others Do you mean defining a subclass of TreeItemRenderer and calling addChild() in its constructor? Then it seems not easy to position and resize the embeded controls intuitively. What's worse, this subclass is of course hard to reuse. And I just gave a simplified case. What if I want a super tree item renderer consisting of a ItemRendererA, a ItemRendererB, a ControlA, a ControlB, a ControlC ... ? Don't you think it is much more convenient and elegant to combine all these controls and standard item renderers in one container using mxml than to write a item renderer subclass in AS and fill it with all these stuffs as if it is a container? (You should notice I have no hard logic to code here, but just a little layout composition to build and data bindings to make.) Now that we have mxml as a nice layout framework, why don't we make it better and let developers combine all the available elements on it to build whatever they can imagine at will? --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com , Alex Harui [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why composite? Just add the label when you subclass.
[flexcoders] Re: How to compose a super tree item renderer using TreeItemRenderer and others
Being an AS class is not a compelling reason of not being able to be used as a
mxml tag.
Otherwise, why can I use a subclass of TreeItemRenderer in my mxml code(see my
second
example code)?
However, I am more anxious that you could tell me something about my second
problem.
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Tracy Spratt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
TreeItemRenderer is an AS class, but not an mxml tag.
You can't do a serious TreeItemRenderer in-line.
See this example for a start:
http://www.cflex.net/showFileDetails.cfm?ObjectID=575
Tracy
From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of an0one
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 11:18 AM
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [flexcoders] How to compose a super tree item renderer using
TreeItemRenderer and others
Hi,
I want a custom tree item renderer that consists of a basic
TreeItemRenderer(to reuse its
tree node icons) and several other standard controls(they are also
IListItemRenderer
implementors). Let's call it ComboTreeItemRenderer, and to simplify the
matters, assume
it is composed of a TreeItemRenderer and a Label.
This is my first try:
mx:Tree width=100% height=100%
id=tagTree
dataProvider={myTags}
change=handleTagSelection(event);
mx:itemRenderer
mx:Component
mx:HBox
mx:TreeItemRenderer
/mx:TreeItemRenderer
mx:Label text=[EMAIL PROTECTED]
/mx:Label
/mx:HBox
/mx:Component
/mx:itemRenderer
/mx:Tree
And the first error I met:
Could not resolve mx:TreeItemRenderer to a component implementation.
I don't believe TreeItemRenderer can not be used in mxml coding, so I
guess I was just not
coding in the right way. But what's the right way then?
However, that's not really what I was stumped by, since I found that I
could write a custom
component(named MyTreeItemRenderer) which extends
TreeItemRenderer(nothing to
override, just to work around the could no resolve error), and it
could be resolved of
course. So here is my second try:
mx:Tree width=100% height=100%
id=tagTree
dataProvider={myTags}
change=handleTagSelection(event);
mx:itemRenderer
mx:Component
mx:HBox
mx:MyTreeItemRenderer
/mx:MyTreeItemRenderer
mx:Label text=[EMAIL PROTECTED]
/mx:Label
/mx:HBox
/mx:Component
/mx:itemRenderer
/mx:Tree
Now comes the really difficulties: I know I must assign values to some
properties of
MyTreeItemRenderer using information carried by data and listData, but
what properties
to assign value to? And what makes me even crazier is that I found
neither listData and
data was set(observed by overriding set listData and set data functions
and find they were
never called).
Looking forward to seeing helpful hints. Thanks in advance.
[flexcoders] Re: How to compose a super tree item renderer using TreeItemRenderer and others
I know how to create a subclass of TreeItemRenderer and use it as the
itemRenderer of a
Tree. What I can't quite figure out is how to create a composite tree item
renderer
enclosing a TreeItemRenderer and a Label.
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Alex Harui [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You may need to bind the new renderer's .data to the TreeITemRenderer's
.data property.
I would just extend TreeItemRenderer and change what it does, though.
From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of an0one
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 8:18 AM
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [flexcoders] How to compose a super tree item renderer using
TreeItemRenderer and others
Hi,
I want a custom tree item renderer that consists of a basic
TreeItemRenderer(to reuse its
tree node icons) and several other standard controls(they are also
IListItemRenderer
implementors). Let's call it ComboTreeItemRenderer, and to simplify the
matters, assume
it is composed of a TreeItemRenderer and a Label.
This is my first try:
mx:Tree width=100% height=100%
id=tagTree
dataProvider={myTags}
change=handleTagSelection(event);
mx:itemRenderer
mx:Component
mx:HBox
mx:TreeItemRenderer
/mx:TreeItemRenderer
mx:Label text=[EMAIL PROTECTED]
/mx:Label
/mx:HBox
/mx:Component
/mx:itemRenderer
/mx:Tree
And the first error I met:
Could not resolve mx:TreeItemRenderer to a component implementation.
I don't believe TreeItemRenderer can not be used in mxml coding, so I
guess I was just not
coding in the right way. But what's the right way then?
However, that's not really what I was stumped by, since I found that I
could write a custom
component(named MyTreeItemRenderer) which extends
TreeItemRenderer(nothing to
override, just to work around the could no resolve error), and it
could be resolved of
course. So here is my second try:
mx:Tree width=100% height=100%
id=tagTree
dataProvider={myTags}
change=handleTagSelection(event);
mx:itemRenderer
mx:Component
mx:HBox
mx:MyTreeItemRenderer
/mx:MyTreeItemRenderer
mx:Label text=[EMAIL PROTECTED]
/mx:Label
/mx:HBox
/mx:Component
/mx:itemRenderer
/mx:Tree
Now comes the really difficulties: I know I must assign values to some
properties of
MyTreeItemRenderer using information carried by data and listData, but
what properties
to assign value to? And what makes me even crazier is that I found
neither listData and
data was set(observed by overriding set listData and set data functions
and find they were
never called).
Looking forward to seeing helpful hints. Thanks in advance.
RE: [flexcoders] Re: How to compose a super tree item renderer using TreeItemRenderer and others
Why composite? Just add the label when you subclass.
From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of an0one
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 7:22 AM
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [flexcoders] Re: How to compose a super tree item renderer
using TreeItemRenderer and others
I know how to create a subclass of TreeItemRenderer and use it as the
itemRenderer of a
Tree. What I can't quite figure out is how to create a composite tree
item renderer
enclosing a TreeItemRenderer and a Label.
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com
, Alex Harui [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You may need to bind the new renderer's .data to the
TreeITemRenderer's
.data property.
I would just extend TreeItemRenderer and change what it does, though.
From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com
[mailto:flexcoders@yahoogroups.com mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com
] On
Behalf Of an0one
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 8:18 AM
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com
Subject: [flexcoders] How to compose a super tree item renderer using
TreeItemRenderer and others
Hi,
I want a custom tree item renderer that consists of a basic
TreeItemRenderer(to reuse its
tree node icons) and several other standard controls(they are also
IListItemRenderer
implementors). Let's call it ComboTreeItemRenderer, and to simplify
the
matters, assume
it is composed of a TreeItemRenderer and a Label.
This is my first try:
mx:Tree width=100% height=100%
id=tagTree
dataProvider={myTags}
change=handleTagSelection(event);
mx:itemRenderer
mx:Component
mx:HBox
mx:TreeItemRenderer
/mx:TreeItemRenderer
mx:Label text=[EMAIL PROTECTED]
/mx:Label
/mx:HBox
/mx:Component
/mx:itemRenderer
/mx:Tree
And the first error I met:
Could not resolve mx:TreeItemRenderer to a component
implementation.
I don't believe TreeItemRenderer can not be used in mxml coding, so I
guess I was just not
coding in the right way. But what's the right way then?
However, that's not really what I was stumped by, since I found that I
could write a custom
component(named MyTreeItemRenderer) which extends
TreeItemRenderer(nothing to
override, just to work around the could no resolve error), and it
could be resolved of
course. So here is my second try:
mx:Tree width=100% height=100%
id=tagTree
dataProvider={myTags}
change=handleTagSelection(event);
mx:itemRenderer
mx:Component
mx:HBox
mx:MyTreeItemRenderer
/mx:MyTreeItemRenderer
mx:Label text=[EMAIL PROTECTED]
/mx:Label
/mx:HBox
/mx:Component
/mx:itemRenderer
/mx:Tree
Now comes the really difficulties: I know I must assign values to some
properties of
MyTreeItemRenderer using information carried by data and listData, but
what properties
to assign value to? And what makes me even crazier is that I found
neither listData and
data was set(observed by overriding set listData and set data
functions
and find they were
never called).
Looking forward to seeing helpful hints. Thanks in advance.
