I was looking for a way to create a no-maximum NumericStepper and came up with 
the idea of listening to the Change event and just upping the maximum value by 
1-stepSize unit above the current value.

The only thing was, I needed to use a callLater() in order to change the 
maximum or else the change didn't take effect in time.

So I would suggest a listener on each, in which you would calculate the new 
maximum of the "other" two steppers, then perform a callLater that looks like 
this:

callLater(resetMaxValues, [newMaxValue, stepperA, stepperB])

... and then something like this:

private function resetMaxValues(newMaxValue:int, stepperA:NumericStepper, 
stepperB:NumericStepper):void
{
     stepperA.maximum = newMaxValue;
     stepperB.maximum = newMaxValue;
}

--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Tracy Spratt" <tspr...@...> wrote:
>
> I have a change event handler on each.  It would perform the logic and
> adjust the other three.  Or is it the logic itself you are asking about?
> 
> Tracy
> 
>  
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:flexcod...@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of grimmwerks
> Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2008 5:50 PM
> To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [flexcoders] weird NumericStepper question / script
> 
>  
> 
> I've got 4 NumericSteppers; and the problem I'm having is one I can't 
> get my head 'round: the values of all the NumericSteppers have to add 
> up to 100.
> 
> On the whole I could easily check via a 'submit' button if they don't 
> addup, but I'd like to check on any of the stepper's 'change' function 
> -- what I was thinking was:
> 
> As a one is going up, the maximum of all the others goes down in a 
> cycle (ie if someone is putting numB, then C then D -- they're max 
> slowly goes down.
> 
> If the max value of a numeric stepper meets the current value of that 
> stepper, and there's no more 'room' -- then the user can't keep 
> increasing the size of the current numeric.
> 
> Is this making sense? In other words, how does one tie in the value of 
> one stepper with another to equal 100. Sure, having 2 steppers makes 
> it easier somewhat, but with 4 I don't know how best to pay attention 
> to them all while still keeping the numbers validating.
> 
> I'd appreciate any thoughts.
>


Reply via email to