A minimal case that demonstrates the issue would be helpful, thanks.

On Saturday, March 15, 2014, Scott Nelson <[email protected]> wrote:

> I think I'm experiencing something related to this.  I have a few
> secretary (https://github.com/gf3/secretary) routes setup and each
> handler renders a root component into the document body.  I'm encountering
> a strange timing issue after doing the following:
>
> - update the app state atom (this causes a re-render of the current root
> component)
> - dispatch a new route handler (which calls om/root again with a new
> component)
>
> It seems like about half of the time the new component is never displayed.
>  Inserting a small delay between the two steps fixes the problem which is
> why I suspect this is a timing issue.
>
> On Friday, February 7, 2014 8:01:21 PM UTC-5, David Pidcock wrote:
> > You got me thinking : if we're storing drop-index,  why not just use it
> during the build phase as follows :
> >
> > (apply dom/ul #js {:className "sortable" :ref "sortable"}
> >     (flatten (map-indexed
> >                                       (fn [idx item]
> >                                          [(when (= idx (:drop-index
> state))
> >                                             (sortable-spacer (second
> (:cell-dimensions state))))
> >                                           (om/build line-item item
> {:opts opts :key :id} )
> >                                           ])
> >                                         init-list ))))))
> >
> > Which gives us the spacer item in the right place without "adulterating"
> the list with it. Not sure if flatten here will perform any better than the
> insert-at function, but I'm not quite sure if there's a better way to
> achieve this sort of thing.
> >
> > On Friday, February 7, 2014 4:37:24 PM UTC-8, David Pidcock wrote:
> > > Hmm, really?  How would you do it differently?
> > > Seems like the perseus orderer uses the same technique  (slicing out
> the card you're about to drag, and inserting a placeholder at that index
> instead)
> > >
> > > On Friday, February 7, 2014 10:25:41 AM UTC-8, David Nolen wrote:
> > > > Without a minimal case it's hard for me to understand what the
> problem is. I will say the spacer technique in my sorting example was a
> simple hack and not the way I would do a sortable - I suspect it may be the
> source of some of these issues.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
>
> --
> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with
> your first post.
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "ClojureScript" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected] <javascript:;>.
> To post to this group, send email to 
> [email protected]<javascript:;>
> .
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.
>

-- 
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ClojureScript" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.

Reply via email to