In PAYG fashion we/you would need to create a new set of beads that work with ICollectionView rather than generalizing.
‹peter On 1/25/18, 5:36 PM, "Gabe Harbs" <[email protected]> wrote: >Yeah. Maybe. In my case, I just used Array instead of ArrayList, but that >shouldn¹t really be necessaryŠ > >> On Jan 26, 2018, at 12:29 AM, Piotr Zarzycki >><[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi Harbs, >> >> I've looked couple of times into the DropDownList from Basic. Maybe it's >> time to reorganize things. Add there View, Model, Renderers etc ? I did >> that for MDL DropDownList. >> >> Thanks, Piotr >> >> 2018-01-25 23:18 GMT+01:00 Gabe Harbs <[email protected]>: >> >>> The dataProvider setter in DropDownList has the following code: >>> >>> for (i = 0; i < n; i++) { >>> opt = document.createElement('option') as >>> HTMLOptionElement; >>> if (lf) >>> opt.text = value[i][lf]; >>> else >>> opt.text = value[i]; >>> dd.add(opt, null); >>> } >>> >>> Basically, it makes the assumption that the dataProvider is an >>> index-accessible object. This is not the case if the dataProvider is a >>> collection. In that case, the code should be something like this: >>> >>> opt.text = value.getItemAt(i)[lf]; >>> else >>> opt.text = value.getItemAt(i); >>> >>> I¹m not sure of the best way to generalize this. >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> Harbs >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Piotr Zarzycki >> >> Patreon: >>*https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pat >>reon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki&data=02%7C01%7Cpent%40adobe.com%7C724d30423d3844 >>1d3d2208d564441339%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636525165 >>903100864&sdata=ZkXTZnuXlNS%2BK3mWSES4ZO2l8BJWRepVkMgxes4FbNM%3D&reserved >>=0 >> >><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pat >>reon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki&data=02%7C01%7Cpent%40adobe.com%7C724d30423d3844 >>1d3d2208d564441339%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636525165 >>903100864&sdata=ZkXTZnuXlNS%2BK3mWSES4ZO2l8BJWRepVkMgxes4FbNM%3D&reserved >>=0>* >
