Thanks very much for that info, I'm sure it will come in handy any day now. For the moment I have kept aside my home-made selector system in favour of simply keeping an ArrayList of element IDs. I know the IDs of the elements I'm creating because as I create the elements I am giving them and ID and the storing that in a simple ArrayList<Integer>. Then, later when I want to "select" those elements I just loop through the array list and call DOM.getElementByID(ID) method. This seems to be ok for me because getElementById is a native browser function and so one would hope that it's implemented very efficiently, and also on any given page I will have at most about 80 of these selectable elements. The performance cost is cheap.
On Jun 24, 3:36 pm, Chris Lercher <[email protected]> wrote: > On Jun 24, 1:08 pm, Paul Schwarz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > But getting back to GWTQuery, it looks interesting, but now that I've > > solved my "Element selector woes" why else should I delve into > > GWTQuery? > > No need to do that, but GWTQuery provides the easy selector syntax you > mentioned in your first post. So it's very suitable to find elements > in an "unknown" part of the DOM. > > However - especially if you build the DOM via GWT - you can also hold > direct references to your elements, and put them in ArrayLists etc., > if you can afford the bit of extra runtime memory for these > references. Then you don't have to search them anymore. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
