Thank you for the replay Martin. My apologies, while doing the demo I've
ignored the reverse binding not even realizing what it was used for.
Regards,
Piotr
Martin Wittemann wrote:
>
> Hello Piotr,
>
>> What would be the best solution to keep the model and view synchronized
>> and
>> has anyt
Hello Piotr,
> What would be the best solution to keep the model and view synchronized and
> has anything changed in this regard ?
Sure there has a lot changed since the original post about a year ago. I have
introduced the reverse binding for the list controller [1] and added a demo [2]
which
Hello Martin
I have the same case. The model isn't updated from the view, the checkbox
list, due to single value binding.
What would be the best solution to keep the model and view synchronized and
has anything changed in this regard ?
Regards,
Piotr
Martin Wittemann wrote:
>
> Hello Will,
Hello Will,
as i read your mail i thought its an easy one. I hat the reason why
its not working immediately in my mind. This behavior can be explained
by the idea of the single value binding which is always in one
direction. The controller.bindProperty method call in the delegate
uses the
Nice one, thanks... I thought that might be it, but still no dice.
In the meantime I have worked around it by creating a subclass of
checkbox and adding instances of it to the list, but I'd still like to
find out what I'm doing wrong with the controller.
Cheers,
Will
2009/4/30 Derrell Lipman :
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 12:13 PM, Will Morton wrote:
>
> /*** listtest/MyBean.js ***/
>
> qx.Class.define("listtest.MyBean", {
>extend: qx.core.Object,
>construct: function(name) {
>this.setName(name);
>},
>
Will, I don't know if this is your only problem,
Hello Qooxdooers;
I have just started hacking around with qooxdoo, and am very
impressed. I have however encountered a problem. I am creating a
list of checkboxes which are bound to objects, so that when the user
[un]checks one of the list items, this makes a change to the
corresponding object,
