GEF infrastructure in Views instead of Editors [message #193089] |
Wed, 24 August 2005 14:06 |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: cleversons.gmail.com
Hi,
Is it possible to use Views instead of Editors when using GEF?
I'm currently extending GraphicalEditorWithFlyoutPalette on my application
and I would like to know if I could use some specific ViewPart
implementation instead.
Any help is much appreciated.
|
|
|
Re: GEF infrastructure in Views instead of Editors [message #193096 is a reply to message #193089] |
Wed, 24 August 2005 14:52 |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: gslade.no.spam.us.ibm.com
I've embedded a GEF 'editor' into a view. It was used purely as a viewer
though so you could not manipulate it in anyway..... it showed a tree
representation of a language constract.... as the line of code in the
text editor changed so did the GEF based tree view of it.
Guy
Cleverson Schmidt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is it possible to use Views instead of Editors when using GEF?
> I'm currently extending GraphicalEditorWithFlyoutPalette on my
> application and I would like to know if I could use some specific
> ViewPart implementation instead.
>
> Any help is much appreciated.
>
|
|
|
Re: GEF infrastructure in Views instead of Editors [message #193103 is a reply to message #193089] |
Wed, 24 August 2005 15:00 |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: none.us.ibm.com
You can use GEF anywhere. I wouldn't recommend trying to force the editor
inside a view since that requires a lot of hacking. You can just write your
own View implementation and create a graphical viewer inside it.
"Cleverson Schmidt" <cleversons@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:31a26c1befb720b1e0ed5439a56cbf17$1@www.eclipse.org...
> Hi,
>
> Is it possible to use Views instead of Editors when using GEF?
> I'm currently extending GraphicalEditorWithFlyoutPalette on my application
> and I would like to know if I could use some specific ViewPart
> implementation instead.
>
> Any help is much appreciated.
>
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03927 seconds