Right, so layout code would have to check for display=="none" and not set display and listen for the show event.
Maybe as you clean up the setting of display multiple times it will be come clear as to whether listening for "show" is cheaper/cleaner than displayStyleForLayout. -Alex On 8/3/17, 8:18 AM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >The problem is that visible is set before the bead exists. > >BTW, Some of the layout seem to be reading and setting display multiple >times. That can cause layout thrashing. That should probably be resolved. > >> On Aug 3, 2017, at 6:05 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote: >> >> FWIW, I'm not sure this is the best pattern. It was what we did to get >> the examples to run. >> >> Another option is that layout beads listen for changes to visible and >> reset the CSS display style when visible changes. >> >> Food for thought, >> -Alex >> >> On 8/3/17, 8:00 AM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I’m using a VerticalFlexLayout in a component. Under certain >>> circumstances, I need to set the visibility of the component to false. >>> >>> These two settings are contradictory in JS. >>> >>> visible=false sets display to none >>> VerticalFlexLayout sets the display to flex >>> >>> When setting visible to false, it uses a property >>>“displayStyleForLayout” >>> to store the value set by the layout. The problem is that the layout >>> might be applied AFTER visible is already set to false (which is the >>>case >>> in my situation). >>> >>> I’m thinking of solving this by exposing displayStyleForLayout so it >>>can >>> be set by beads if necessary. >>> >>> Scratch that. I see that already exists. Problem solved… I’ll fix the >>> layouts. >>> >>> Harbs >> >
