set your renderer to an IFactory. this is a pretty standard way of doing
things.

On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 1:19 PM, valdhor <valdhorli...@embarqmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> The only computation I see is determining which component to use. With your
> original idea you would still need the same computation to figure out which
> (sub) item renderer to use. I still think you are trying to hide the woods
> using more trees.
>
>
> --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com <flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>, Wesley
> Acheson <wesley.ache...@...> wrote:
> >
> > Yeah thats the way I've done it previously. I thought that this way would
> > cut out on some additional computation.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 6:04 PM, valdhor <valdhorli...@...>wrote:
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > That seems overly complicated to me. What I would try is create two
> custom
> > > components then instantiate the appropriate one based on the data and
> add it
> > > in the updateDisplayList method.
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com 
> > > <flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com><flexcoders%
> 40yahoogroups.com>, Wesley
>
> > > Acheson <wesley.acheson@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Since nobody has replied I'm continueing to try this. I currently
> think I
> > > > may need to override all methods in UI component.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Is it clear what I'm trying to do?
> > > >
> > > > Is this the wrong way of doing it?
> > > >
> > > > I think its probably lighter than wrapping to components in a fully
> > > fledged
> > > > UI component?
> > > > *
> > > > Some Thoughts*
> > > >
> > > > Also a comment on ListItemRenderer, theres an awful lot of methods
> that
> > > need
> > > > to be implemented to make this work. I doubt all of them are used in
> a
> > > List
> > > > Senario. Even implementing them all theres still a dependency on
> > > > DisplayObject (who's methods seem to be implemented). It does feel to
> me
> > > > like the architecture seems a bit off. I mean if all of those methods
> are
> > > > implemented why is there still a dependency on DisplayObject.
> > > >
> > > > Its not just enough to implement IListRenderer which seems to defeat
> the
> > > > purpose of an interace
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 11:42 PM, Wesley Acheson
> > > > <wesley.acheson@>wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > *Disclaimer:* This is a cross post with Stack Overflow. I know at
> least
> > > > > one person on this list saw it there.
> > > > >
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3507313/flex-switch-item-renderer
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi
> > > > >
> > > > > I was wondering if anyone had any luck with the following senario
> in
> > > flex.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd like to be able to have a custom item renderer which delegates
> to
> > > > > another renderer inside.
> > > > >
> > > > > The reason for this would be in a datagrid for instance displaying
> a
> > > > > checkbox if the dataprovider for the row had a boolean value. Using
> the
> > > > > default item renderer when the value was a non boolean.
> > > > >
> > > > > Basically I was hoping to use a proxy object (though not
> necessarily
> > > the
> > > > > proxy class) so that I could a renderer which delegated all of its
> > > > > responsibilties to a sub renderer.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hard to explain.
> > > > >
> > > > > *Edit 1*
> > > > >
> > > > > I think the following gives a clearer idea of what I had in mind.
> This
> > > is
> > > > > only knocked up quickly for the purpose of showing the idea.
> > > > >
> > > > > *SwitchingRenderer.as*
> > > > >
> > > > > package com.example
> > > > > {
> > > > > import mx.controls.CheckBox;
> > > > >
> > > > > import mx.controls.dataGridClasses.DataGridItemRenderer;
> > > > >
> > > > > import mx.controls.listClasses.BaseListData;
> > > > >
> > > > > import mx.controls.listClasses.IDropInListItemRenderer;
> > > > >
> > > > > import mx.core.IDataRenderer;
> > > > >
> > > > > import mx.core.UIComponent;
> > > > >
> > > > > public class SwitchingRenderer extends UIComponent implements
> > > IDataRenderer, IDropInListItemRenderer
> > > > >
> > > > > {
> > > > > private var checkboxRenderer:CheckBox;
> > > > >
> > > > > private var defaultRenderer:DataGridItemRenderer;
> > > > >
> > > > > private var currentRenderer:IDataRenderer;
> > > > >
> > > > > public function SwitchingRenderer()
> > > > >
> > > > > {
> > > > > this.checkboxRenderer = new CheckBox();
> > > > >
> > > > > this.defaultRenderer = new DataGridItemRenderer();
> > > > >
> > > > > this.currentRenderer = defaultRenderer();
> > > > >
> > > > > super();
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > public function get data():Object
> > > > >
> > > > > {
> > > > > //If the data for this cell is a boolean
> > > > > // currentRender = checkBoxRenderer
> > > > >
> > > > > // otherwise
> > > > > // currentRenderer = defaultRenderer
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > public function set data(value:Object):void
> > > > >
> > > > > {
> > > > > currentRenderer.data = value;
> > > > >
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > public function get listData():BaseListData
> > > > >
> > > > > {
> > > > > return currentRenderer.listData;
> > > > >
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > public function set listData(value:BaseListData):void
> > > > >
> > > > > {
> > > > > currentRenderer.listData = value;
> > > > >
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > }
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>  
>



-- 
j:pn
\\no comment

Reply via email to