The code in TextAreaSkin currently looks like this:
  @Override
    public int getPreferredWidth(int height) {
        return 0;
    }
    @Override
    public Dimensions getPreferredSize() {
        return new Dimensions(0, 0);
    }

So it really doesn't matter what TerraTableViewSkin does.


Greg Brown wrote:
> To clarify, if TerraTableViewSkin is currently asking the renderer for its 
> unconstrained preferred width when the column width is *not* set to -1, it is 
> probably a bug.
>
> On Nov 18, 2009, at 9:09 AM, Greg Brown wrote:
>
>   
>> My point is that TableView shouldn't ever be asking for the renderer's 
>> unconstrained preferred width unless the column width is set to -1. I would 
>> consider that an edge case for now.
>>
>> On Nov 18, 2009, at 9:06 AM, Noel Grandin wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> The height is fine, it's the width that is a problem.
>>>
>>> The situation is that I'm putting a TextArea to use as a cell renderer
>>> in a TableView, and I need it to return a useful width to the TableView.
>>>
>>> Greg Brown wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Under what circumstances is this an issue? Can't we just ask the renderer 
>>>> for its constrained preferred height (based on the column width) when 
>>>> variableRowHeight is set to true? Actually, I would think we should be 
>>>> doing that either way. The only time this wouldn't work is when the column 
>>>> width is set to -1, but I would think that could be considered an edge 
>>>> case for now.
>>>>
>>>> I'm reluctant to make any non-critical changes to TextArea at this point, 
>>>> since it is a very complex component and I don't want to introduce any 
>>>> issues before we release 1.4.
>>>>
>>>> G
>>>>
>>>> On Nov 18, 2009, at 7:06 AM, Noel Grandin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> Hi
>>>>>
>>>>> I note that TextAreaSkin returns [0,0] in getPreferredSize().
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there a reason for this behaviour?
>>>>> I was trying to use TextArea as a renderer for my variableRowHeight
>>>>> TableView, but without a real preferredSize it doesn't work too well.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, Noel.
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>>         
>
>   

Reply via email to