Hi,

I'm looking also for a simple example of union/struct other than
form_gui, as it is not so easy to understand, i followed this thread
(with that name) catched in July. Would be please to take a look at that
sample!

Thanks,

Phil 


On Mon, 2004-07-05 at 18:35, Vilya Harvey wrote:
> Joerg Heinicke wrote:
> > The good news: It is not an error in the implementation, but in your form
> > definition. But it's still a "not so intuitive" implementation then.
> 
> Thanks so much for this! With your alterations it works like a charm.
> 
> > The solution (hoping that Tim also reads it):
> > The implicite cases are really hard to understand, especially as there is
> > fb:case and ft:case, but no fd:case. The fd:struct I use also has effect on the
> > template and binding (I have to add them there too to get the same tree) and
> > complicates them unnecessarily. Why don't we simply introduce explicite fd:case
> > - until we have masks ;-)
> > 
> > WDYT?
> 
> 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?
> 
> > To Vilya: That's a very nice sample of using union. As I was searching for a
> > simpler sample than the Form Model GUI do you want to provide it to the project?
> > Maybe with the "real" functionality of editing a row as for the moment one can
> > only cancel the editing. Would be really cool - and I have less work to do ;-)
> 
> Sure thing, I'm happy to contribute it. I don't quite have the editing part 
> working yet, but will submit it as soon as I do. How do I go about 
> submitting it?
> 
> BTW I also have an extension of the repeater widget which handles 
> pagination, that I'd like to submit.
> 
> Cheers,
> Vil.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to