On 2/20/07, Merrill, Jason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>inherited functions aren't automatically > >>called (except in the case of no-arg constructors). > > Well, not true as I understand it in inheritance, it depends on what it > inherits from - i.e., if I put a trace in setValue in my class, compile > my file, the method fires every time the checkbox is cliked in the > datagrid cell - I make no calls to super. Here is my class
I think we're talking at cross purposes. What I'm trying to say is that the _parent class's_ implementation of setValue() - i.e. the default one that would get called if you hadn't written your own - might do something that sets a value in the dataProvider. Because you have _overridden_ setValue, you are skipping your parent class's implementation. The parent code for setValue will never get called _unless_ you use super.setValue in your function. That's how inheritance works. So it might be worth trying that. But I may be wrong in guessing that the parent class does something useful for you. If it doesn't, I think you explicitly need to set a value within your dataProvider in your setValue() function. Which is why, instead, I suggested something along the lines of: item[getDataLabel()]=(sel)?'Y':'N'; which explicitly sets the value that you are using to populate your checkbox, which, I'm guessing, comes straight out of your dataProvider. If the reference to item doesn't work, you may have to reference dataProvider directly. Other than that, I don't have enough context to go further, I'm afraid. Just trying to suggest obvious routes. Apologies if I'm being obscure. Ian _______________________________________________ osflash mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
