Gradually filling a virtual table [message #438571] |
Mon, 28 June 2004 10:34 |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: thomas_maeder.ch.ibm.com
Hello everyone,
I've been playing around with the virtual table implementation in 3.0.
I've come across a scenario where I don't know how to use the
"virtualness" to my advantage: Here's what I'd like to do:
1) I'd like to show a sorted list of elements in the table
2) I start out with 0 elements in the table
3) every 500 ms, I'd like to add around 1000 elements. They should show
up at the location where they belong in the sort order (may be at the
beginnning).
Here are a couple of things I tried:
1) if I just increase the table count by 1000, I do not get a setData
callback for already existing table items
2) If I work around this by doing a
table.setItemCount(0);
table.setItemCount(realValue);
The table flashes.
3) If I add the new items by doing new TableItem(...), I get the same
behaviour as in the non-virtual case (i.e. the performance degrades as
the table contains more elements). (Perhaps the defaul-visible
constructor with the "create" parameter should be public?)
what am I missing?
Thomas
|
|
|
Re: Gradually filling a virtual table [message #438683 is a reply to message #438571] |
Wed, 30 June 2004 08:55 |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: thomas_maeder.ch.ibm.com
Everybody on vacation, I guess? Or is that use just not supported?
Thomas Mäder wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I've been playing around with the virtual table implementation in 3.0.
> I've come across a scenario where I don't know how to use the
> "virtualness" to my advantage: Here's what I'd like to do:
>
> 1) I'd like to show a sorted list of elements in the table
> 2) I start out with 0 elements in the table
> 3) every 500 ms, I'd like to add around 1000 elements. They should show
> up at the location where they belong in the sort order (may be at the
> beginnning).
>
> Here are a couple of things I tried:
>
> 1) if I just increase the table count by 1000, I do not get a setData
> callback for already existing table items
> 2) If I work around this by doing a
> table.setItemCount(0);
> table.setItemCount(realValue);
>
> The table flashes.
>
> 3) If I add the new items by doing new TableItem(...), I get the same
> behaviour as in the non-virtual case (i.e. the performance degrades as
> the table contains more elements). (Perhaps the defaul-visible
> constructor with the "create" parameter should be public?)
>
> what am I missing?
>
>
> Thomas
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03690 seconds