The object is being passed to the first arraycollection through LCDS, and in
the CFC I am creating a struct. I have no problem with the idea of converting
it to another data type such as an XML string. The problem is I can't bind it
to one ROW and column, I need to bind it to the second column of all rows -
basically the first grid is the primary key in column one, and the property
with all other columns and values in the object.
If I have a row selected in the second grid, or it's sorted or filtered in some
way, and I do a removeall and then repopulate it...what will happen? I suppose
I can store the sort, filter, and selectedIndex, and then reapply them after
the refill - but I want to avoid any kind of "flicker" that the user would see.
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Tracy Spratt" <tr...@...> wrote:
>
> You can't use an Object as a dataProvider. So you either need to loop using
> for-each, or use a different data type for the second column.
>
>
>
> An ArrayCollection might be best, then you could bind the second DG:
>
> dataProvider="{dg1.selectedItem.acCol2}"
>
>
>
> Tracy Spratt,
>
> Lariat Services, development services available
>
> _____
>
> From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:flexcod...@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of postwick
> Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2009 5:43 PM
> To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [flexcoders] bind one arraycollection to another
>
>
>
>
>
> I have an arraycollection that has two columns. the second column actually
> stores an object that has properties on it. I want to put those values into
> a second datagrid. Can I do this using binding? I was able to use a loop to
> fill the second arraycollection, to which a datagrid is bound, by triggering
> the loop function from the first arraycollection's collectionChange event.
>
> However, I don't like this approach because it'll probably cause issues with
> selectedItem on the datagrid (removeAll then repopulate would throw it off),
> as well as a noticeable "flicker" when dealing with a large dataset.
>
> If there's another format for the second column in the first arraycollection
> that would work better than an object, I'm open to that too.
>
