On 10/31/11 3:05 AM, Jacek Kałucki wrote: > Użytkownik Paul McNett napisał: >> > And neither of you two seem to understand the point of my changes. It >> > isn't about >> > flicker, and it isn't about wanting to delay the child requeries. It is >> > simply about >> > optimizing - in the UI - the quick navigation of records. > I do understand and agree with your goals but disagree the way you achieve it. > I'm just a bit angry because half of my existing code stop working with your > changes.
Please clarify: your code in r6956 doesn't work? If not, what isn't working? (Because that would be an introduced bug). > I previously mentioned how much I hate timing code because it's unpredictable. > Now you break data integrity chain in both, business and UI layer what makes > me crying, > while you could achieve the same results with the way I show in example, with > one exception, > make "defferChild" function a class public interface member. I'm sorry I haven't had time to look at your example yet. > If you want introduce such changes in the framework, why not simply defer > entire > "_moveRecordPointer" method call? Result the same and data integrity remain > achieved. Data integrity isn't broken with my changes. When the user lands on the desired record the child records are requeried just like they always have been. The results are not the same because we can't update the status bar and show some narrow information from the current row to the user. Paul _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-dev Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-dev This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/[email protected]
