This is not really about itemRenderers. More to do with regular mxml components I think, but tbh that is 'gut feel' and I didn't try to check a lot of the details so far, just was happy to make more things work. I will try to investigate/understand the potential mxmlDocument mismatch today and either report back here or fix it if I think it is obvious. Using '_bindings' in this might ultimately be a more performant option, and (although probably relatively rare) could perhaps avoid adding default binding support in some cases where it is not needed, I think.
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 4:11 AM Alex Harui <[email protected]> wrote: > Not opposed if it works, but do you know why it is needed? It makes me > worry that the mxmlDocument chain isn't set up properly and we'll end up > with other related bugs. Is the problem in mx:Container-based > itemrenderers? If so, the factories may need to propagate mxmlDocument > across the gaps in the DOM where non-UIComponents exist. > > HTH, > -Alex > > On 5/28/20, 5:00 AM, "Greg Dove" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Alex, > > I hope you are ok with this change: > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Froyale-asjs%2Fcommit%2F26d4b9cf7c1968160278754a01bd612946ddf41d&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C7034bdf00e5c47b6fa4708d802feb42c%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637262640254601272&sdata=UV%2F7%2FuX8nBNIHWJXp0YKCycjR0PkfvstUJv0lexZ%2B0s%3D&reserved=0 > > > It makes a big difference in a large codebase I am working on, many > components with bindings that were not working suddenly started > working. > In the absence of 'this is IBindingClient' I think the '_bindings in > this' > check is as specific as we can get (and very likely faster to execute > in > any case). > > Let me know if you have any objections to that, in case I did not > consider > something else that is obvious to you. > > thanks > Greg > > >
