> Why not pick a good, standardized
> way to manage depths that works in every scenario?
"...tag, you're it!"
Anyway, this has gone on long enough. If you haven't gotten the point
> yet you're never going to.
"...I don't feel like playing anymore."
ok, let's not talk down to others who have good coding practices, even if
they're not your coding practices. It's a good discussion.
Managing the depths the way Ryan does it allows for a lot of control.
getNextHighestDepth can be limiting as you have to predict the appropiate
order of display items which can be problematic in a larger application. But
the manual method sounds even more limiting, labeling depths that not only
are now hard-coded in, but have to be understood and kept track of. I said
it before, order matters, relational depths and not numbers.
This is something that everyone has to deal
> with, and I genuinely thought that others would make more use of
> getNextHighestDepth()
I have my own solution, but everyone else I know of uses getNextHighestDepth.
Those who don't are the proud exception.
Tyler
_______________________________________________
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
