Hi Greg, I think that Basic relies on Array instead of a collection class, and maybe other way to solve it per instance should be to add the " DataItemRendererFactoryForCollectionView" to the beads array via MXML. But maybe since DataGrid composes List, it could not be possible, so maybe this fall back to the options you named, and probably people will want to solve this at app level so all express DGs will use ArrayList instead of Array.
Anyway this is very interesting to see how flexible is the bead subsystem to switch between Array, ArrayList or ArrayCollection for lots of components (be or not nested in others). Hope Alex or others give its opinion Thanks El lun., 3 feb. 2020 a las 0:28, Greg Dove (<[email protected]>) escribió: > I have not really used Express, apart from an attempt to use it for a Crux > example where I had some difficulty with the renderer set up for DataGrid, > which (at that time) I worked around quickly with a monkey patch in the > example instead of investigating the problem at the source. > > I want to get rid of the monkey patch, and fix that example. > > The issue appears to be that the Express Datagrid model uses ArrayList as > dataProvider, but the default render factory creates renderers that expect > Array as dataProvider, so this combination seems wrong. I wanted to check > this because I really have had zero experience with Express.... and based > on the css it seems like this was intended to be addressed using 'typeName' > lookup for the rendererfactory but that seems not to be working. > > I can address the issue by doing the following in Express: > > 1) > Adding the following to express-manifest.xml : > > <component id="DataGridColumnList" > class="org.apache.royale.html.supportClasses.DataGridColumnList" > lookupOnly="true" /> > > 2. Changing the following in Express defaults.css : > > .DataGridColumnList { ...styles follow > > (remove '.') to: > > DataGridColumnList { ...styles follow > > > Those 2 small changes appear to fix the issue, but I'm not sure if it is > 'correct' for Express. Is this how it is intended to be? > -- Carlos Rovira http://about.me/carlosrovira
