After a comment in another thread about a trees and tables, I thought I’d have a go at extending my Table control. Here is the result
You can now add TableRow objects to other TableRow objects, allowing a tree to be created. Depending on the the number of columns you have, whether you have a single depth, and some options, the table will be rendered as a tree, a table, a tree table, or just a list.
Started playing with the table in tree modes… looks to be what I was needing :).
Not a problem for me now, but may help people trying later:
The javadoc examples have twice: childRow.addRow(childRow), which should be parentRow.addRow(childRow) or an exception will occur.
@loopies said:
Started playing with the table in tree modes... looks to be what I was needing :).
Not a problem for me now, but may help people trying later:
The javadoc examples have twice: childRow.addRow(childRow), which should be parentRow.addRow(childRow) or an exception will occur.
Thx again to the two of you.
I’m looking forward to playing with this control as well. Wish I had had it available when I was throwing together the FX Builder thingy.
When I get back to that, I’m going to look into incorporating this into both the main emitter list & script window at a minimum. I’m sure there are many other places this would be useful as well.
Also @rockfire From the thread title it sounds like you can use this to just create a Tree View. I take it this is done by only adding a single column and no headers?
@t0neg0d said:
I'm looking forward to playing with this control as well. Wish I had had it available when I was throwing together the FX Builder thingy.
When I get back to that, I’m going to look into incorporating this into both the main emitter list & script window at a minimum. I’m sure there are many other places this would be useful as well.
Also @rockfire From the thread title it sounds like you can use this to just create a Tree View. I take it this is done by only adding a single column and no headers?
Nice, look forward to seeing it in there
And Yup, thats exactly how you do it.
EDIT: oh good call on the javadoc error :facepalm: