>>>> You might just be able to use the renderer as the drag representation (not >>>> necessarily the one that is attached to the TreeView, but a new instance >>>> populated with the drag content). >>> That would mean I have to call render(Object node, Path path, int rowIndex, >>> TreeView treeView, boolean expanded, boolean selected, >>> TreeView.NodeCheckState checkState, boolean highlighted, boolean disabled), >>> right? I think that will take some conciderable effort to set up. >> There's nothing really to set up. You just need to call render(), passing >> the appropriate values (most of which you can either hard-code or get from >> the tree view itself). > I understand. It seems like more work/code than the first alternative, but > nice to know :)
Well, of course I can't force you to use the renderer approach. ;-) But I'm curious to know why you think calling a single method is more work than creating an offscreen buffer and painting a clipped, translated view of a tree view into it. The renderer is what actually paints the node content, so you're basically indirectly doing the same thing with your current approach, only with more steps. G
