Thanks, Emily! I've got my DropDownDatePicker proof of concept working, if not exactly pretty. I've attached it as a patch in case anyone is interested in having a look.
Other comments in line below.
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 6:03 PM, Emily Crutcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks for the analysis. Yep, as we do the final changes to move DatePicker
> into GWT we are tightening apis, but we definitely don't want to lock them
> down too much either!
>
> I had to copy DefaultCalendarView
> even though I didn't have any change to make in it.
> Made public final now to prevent this use case, as is DefaultMonthSelector
>
Perfect!
> Css
> Css is a public interface that is meant to be extended. So if it causing
> problems, please let me know.
>
> CssHandling (now StandardCss)
> This one is unfortunate, but completely unavoidable, as that entire chunk of
> code will eventually be replaced by a generated class, so we definitely do
> not want to expose the API
>
Makes sense. If it's destined to be generated then that solves the
copying hassle.
> Styler
> Can you tell me the use cases that require access to this class? As we may
> be able to get around this a different way.
>
Over-zealous copying on my part. I was able to prune this without consequence.
> refresh()
> Added protected refreshAll() method to DatePickerComponent.
>
Something like this?
protected void refreshAll() {
getDatePicker().refresh();
}
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 5:18 PM, Isaac Truett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, 99% of that code (I'm estimating...) is C&P from the Default
>> classes. The biggest difference from gen1 seems to be that more code
>> is package-protected than before. I had to copy DefaultCalendarView
>> even though I didn't have any change to make in it. Other seemingly
>> unnecessary copies are the Css, CssHandling, and DateStyler inner
>> classes of DatePicker.
>>
>> I've started to rewrite addMonths() in my MonthSelector and ran into
>> another package-protected method, DatePicker.refresh(), and that's as
>> far as I had gotten before having to return to "real" work.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 5:03 PM, Emily Crutcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > I doubt it, as I'm still finishing the code to create it :-). Can you
>> > tell
>> > me the pain points? As making it easy to extend is something we are
>> > committed to. Are you counting the code to cut/copy the default
>> > calendar
>> > and month selectors?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 4:44 PM, Isaac Truett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Does anyone have a working extension of the gen2 DatePicker? I haven't
>> >> had a lot of time to look at it so I may be doing something horribly
>> >> wrong but it seems that extending it is much more complicated than it
>> >> was with the old DatePicker. I have almost 500 lines of code so far
>> >> and I still haven't finished -- all just to add drop down lists for
>> >> month and year. With the old DatePicker, I did it in under 150 lines.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Emily Crutcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> > Could you review the gen 2 date picker code? The code is in
>> >> > com.google.gwt.gen2.datepicker. This code is going to be moved over
>> >> > to
>> >> > gwt
>> >> > after the handler code is moved, so nitpicks would be very welcome.
>> >> >
>> >> > thanks!
>> >> >
>> >> > Emily
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > "There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
>> >> > binary, and those who don't"
>> >> >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > "There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
>> > binary, and those who don't"
>> >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> "There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
> binary, and those who don't"
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
DropDownDatePicker.patch
Description: Binary data
