[Laszlo-dev] About moving nodes...

[Raju Bitter]

Oh, Henry was quicker. :-)

On Oct 17, 2009, at 8:11 PM, Henry Minsky wrote:

> The Flash 5,6,7,and 8 runtimes couldn't reparent a movieclip, so  
> that was probably a big
> part of the restriction on moving nodes around the hierarchy. Having  
> to fix constraints
> is another big one though, maybe more difficult to deal with cleanly.
>
> The Flash 10 runtime lets you reparent DisplayObjects, and so does  
> the DHTML DOM, so it might be worth thinking about what this  
> capability would be useful for in  LZX.
>
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 1:18 PM, P T Withington <ptw at pobox.com> wrote:
> There is a `placement` attribute, and a `determinePlacement` method  
> that can be overridden by a class, but both of these expect the  
> final placement of a node to be determined at construct time.  I  
> don't know if this restriction is inherent to LzNode, or was a  
> restriction due to some ancient runtime (e.g., swf5).  It might be  
> possible to make placement dynamic.  Clearly any parent/child  
> dependencies would have to be tracked and adjusted as part of this.
>
> <state> is sort of a half-step to this, in that it can dynamically  
> remove and add child views, but state does _not_ guarantee the child  
> view's state information is preserved.  In effect a state destroys  
> and re-creates the child views it controls each time.
>
> You can modulate the `visible` attribute of a view to hide/reveal it  
> and all its children.  Modulating the visibility _does_ preserve the  
> hidden views state.
>
> I'd be interested in seeing an example of an application where views  
> need to move.
>
>
> On 2009-10-16, at 20:39, Rami Ojares / AMG Oy wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Would it even be theoretically possible to make parent attribute of  
> node read/write.
> Now moving nodes around means destroying old ones and creating new  
> ones under new parent.
> This becomes a nightmare when the nodes have all kinds of  
> connections to other nodes.
>
> I know this is a BIG issue but I wondered if this would be even  
> theoretically possible and what it would require.
>
> Now that I do it manually I will have to maintain two way links  
> between dependencies.
>
> Example:
> - A depends on B (a is listening to events from B)
>
> If I move B I have to know who is listening so I can update the  
> delegates to listen to events from the new B node
> If I could move B without destroying it and creating a new one, the  
> delegates would not need updating.
>
> - rami
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Henry Minsky
> Software Architect
> hminsky at laszlosystems.com
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.openlaszlo.org/pipermail/laszlo-dev/attachments/20091017/a0184f22/attachment.html