On Fri, 5 Mar 2021 14:38:06 GMT, Kevin Rushforth <k...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> I guess that depends on whether a `TreeCell` or `TreeTableRow` that is not >> expanded should be considered collapsed. >> >> Unless there are compelling reasons to have cells that are neither expanded >> nor collapsed, I think it is sensible to default to treating non-existing >> items as collapsed. >> >> Currently, once `:expanded` or `:collapsed` has been set, it will not be >> removed even if the item is set to `null`. This should probably be changed >> to either: >> 1. remove any pseudoclass when the item is set to `null`, or >> 2. set the `:collapsed` pseudoclass and remove the `:expanded` pseudoclass >> when the item is set to null. > > It does seems like there is a possible inconsistency for `TreeCell` and > `TreeTableRow`. I'm not sure it matters in practice, since an application > doesn't directly manage the creation of the cells (other than by providing a > cell factory) or setting the item. The pseudo-class state of the cell is a > proxy for the item it points to. Ideally, it would only contain the "empty" > state if the item is null, but given that such a cell would never be rendered > it would be hard to point to something that doesn't work as a result. > > In any case, since there are larger issues than just setting the default > state for `TreeCell` and `TreeTableRow` I'd prefer to decouple them from this > issue and file a follow-up issue (which doesn't need to be looked at any time > soon). I've reverted the changes to `TreeCell` and `TreeTableRow`. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/413
