I don't know why you say there's a lot of stuff happening. It's just using binding (in the form of a binding function) to set an initial selection. Seems completely legitimate to me. The fact that it's a function rather than a direct reference is because of the well-known ComboBox limitations with non-primitive objects.
Yes, the binding function does fire when expected, but I haven't debugged ComboBox itself. I have the workaround I showed, but if I find time I'll try to set up a test case. On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 8:04 AM, Amy <[email protected]> wrote: > --- In [email protected] <flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>, "Tracy > Spratt" <tspr...@...> wrote: > > > > You have a lot of stuff happening in there. Did you debug it to see > why > > it was not working? Particularly the "computeSelectedDateRangeIndex()" > > function? Was it being called when you expected? > > I agree with Tracy. I would expect that to only fire when there's a > change event on one of the variables being used as a parameter for it. > Are those variables bindable? Could there be a case where you _think_ > they changed (i.e. you changed the underlying private variable without > going through the setter), but the setter doesn't _know_ they changed? > > >
