Thank you very much, I'll check it out. :)
--- In [email protected], "Alex Harui" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Panel and other containers have a notion of content children vs
> rawChildren. Borders, titlebars, etc are rawChildren. It is a bit
> harder to do from MXML because we don't let you spec out your
> rawChildren in MXML, the default property is the content children.
>
> So, if you want rawChildren, I'd recommend AS subclassing. That way the
> numChildren and getChildAt calls make more sense to the consumer and
> aren't offset by stuff you stuck in there that they didn't know about.
> If you really gotta go the way of MXML, I think there is a way to use
> [DefaultProperty] to assign a property to an MXML container so all
> children are stuffed in there. I think there's an example on
> quietlyscheming.com.
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Stephen Roy J. Tang
> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 2:38 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [flexcoders] Extending Canvas?
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to create an MXML component extending from canvas, with
> some predefined components (buttons and some graphical elements) and
> behaviors, but I also want any MXMLs using the component to be able to
> specify additional contents for the components. (Since it's a canvas,
> I assume it's the calling screen's responsibility to position it's
> children correctly.)
>
> Of course, first thing I tried is just to do it directly, and I get an
> error "Multiple sets of visual children have been specified...etc".
>
> Is what I'm thinking of possible? Any advice? I took a look at the
> source of another container class (Panel), which I assumed would do
> something similar, but it seems the code there is a bit more
> complicated that I would like. I'm hoping there's a simple way to
> specify that I want to accept visual children from both the component
> declaration and the component instance.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Roy
>
