On Mon, Jul 05, 2004 at 01:44:26PM +0200, Joerg Heinicke wrote: > On 05.07.2004 12:35, Vilya Harvey wrote: > >If we had fd:case, wouldn't that imply that we'd have to duplicate > >widget declarations when the same widget appears in more than one case? > > Yes, that would imply it, but it is not different than before: the cases > are mutually exclusive. To reuse widget declarations there are still > fd:class and fd:new.
Note that these only reuse the widget *definitions*, not the widget instances, so would save typing but not cause cases to share values. Union cases really are mutually exclusive. This is one of the things we are trying to fix in the choice/case and now the masks proposals. > >BTW I also have an extension of the repeater widget which handles > >pagination, that I'd like to submit. > > Looking forward, it would definitely be an interesting contribution. Yes, I would like to see that too. --Tim Larson --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
