Or support for Iterators/ListIterators instead of just enumerations. (With
remove support of course). Granted this does require using J2SE...
-Jamie
Qiuli Sun wrote:
> I think it will be extremely useful if Group.remove( Node node ) is added in
> the future API. When I use removeChild(int index) to remove object, I always
> hope to have a more convienient method to do it.
>
> Qiuli
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion list for Java 3D API
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Paul Byrne
> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 1:23 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JAVA3D] problem with removeChild()
>
> Hi Gregory,
>
> The Group.remove( Node node ) method has already been added to the proposed
> Java3D 1.3 API specification.
>
> Rgds
>
> Paul
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Paul Byrne Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sun Microsystems Phone : (650) 786 9926
> Visualization Software Group Fax : (650) 786 5852
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> >To All,
> >
> >I quickly looked at the Java 3D API documentation before writing this
> >note, so my apologies if I missed something and my knowledge is
> >incorrect.
> >
> >But, this small issue brings up something about the Java3D API that has
> >always irritated me personally. I believe there should be a removeChild
> >( Object an_instance_of_some_object ) method in the Group class.
> >
> >For example, it just doesn't make sense to me that there is an addChild
> >( Node child ) method in the Group class, but no parallel removeChild (
> >Node child ) method.
> >
> >Instead, I have to get an Enumeration of all of the objects, loop
> >through them one by one to determine the proper index, then call
> >removeChild ( index ). All of the above assumes I'm not retaining the
> >order I placed them into the Group object (which can be tricky).
> >
> >In the case where I need to remove multiple objects (but not all
> >objects, which Liming apparently wants to do) which are in random
> >locations throughout the Enumeration things get even more tricky.
> >Because, once I remove the first object some, or all, indexes are
> >updated I have to retrieve the Enumeration once again. Each time I
> >remove an object I have to start all over. I assume this is because
> >there is a Vector or similar type collection behind the scenes.
> >
> >If my assumption that the Group class has a Vector which holds the
> >children is true, I realize that there probably is no significant
> >performance gains to be had by implementation of a removeChild method as
> >I've described. But it would save some coding effort for some of the
> >API's users. And possibly Liming would have never started this thread
> >in the first place.
> >
> >Sorry to vent so much over something so trivial. If I'm doing something
> >wrong I would love to hear how to do it properly. So, flame away!
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Gregory Bradford
> >
>
> ===========================================================================
> To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
> of the message "signoff JAVA3D-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
>
> ===========================================================================
> To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
> of the message "signoff JAVA3D-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff JAVA3D-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
