| [JFace] ViewerColumn and EditingSupport [message #327927] |
Thu, 08 May 2008 10:31  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: eclipse-news.rizzoweb.com
Is there any particular reason why ViewerColumn.getEditingSupport() is
not public or at least protected?
I've written a "builder" that builds custom TableViewerColumns using
custom EditingSupports and CellEditors. The clients of this builder
sometimes need access to the EditingSupport (my custom subclass), but
there is no easy way for them to access it because getEditingSupport()
is only package-visible.
I understand the SWT/JFace philosophy of minimalism when it comes to
API, but a public getter for something that already has a public setter
seems like a reasonable request. As it is, I have to subclass
ViewerColumn, and I can't even subclass TableViewerColumn because it is
final (argh!).
I was thinking of filing a bug about it, but maybe there is a
pre-existing reason it is the way it is...?
Eric
|
|
|
| Re: [JFace] ViewerColumn and EditingSupport [message #328018 is a reply to message #327927] |
Mon, 12 May 2008 13:22  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
You will notice that ColumnViewer.getViewerColumn(int) is also not API. At
least we are consistent... ;-)
Our thinking was that you should not have to do anything with column objects
and editing support after they have been set up. Feel free to open a bug
and convince us otherwise!
Boris
"Eric Rizzo" <eclipse-news@rizzoweb.com> wrote in message
news:fvv2so$cbq$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Is there any particular reason why ViewerColumn.getEditingSupport() is not
> public or at least protected?
> I've written a "builder" that builds custom TableViewerColumns using
> custom EditingSupports and CellEditors. The clients of this builder
> sometimes need access to the EditingSupport (my custom subclass), but
> there is no easy way for them to access it because getEditingSupport() is
> only package-visible.
>
> I understand the SWT/JFace philosophy of minimalism when it comes to API,
> but a public getter for something that already has a public setter seems
> like a reasonable request. As it is, I have to subclass ViewerColumn, and
> I can't even subclass TableViewerColumn because it is final (argh!).
>
> I was thinking of filing a bug about it, but maybe there is a pre-existing
> reason it is the way it is...?
>
> Eric
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03222 seconds
Home