Re: D2006 Object inspector component

Maarten Wiltink pisze:

To tell the truth, I'd probably use neither. I'm a treeview kind of guy.
By all means don't let that stop you. You made it clear that it's not
what you want, and people have in the past made it quite clear to me
that they didn't like my choices all that much, either. Which never
stopped me.

So I will give a go once again to the treeview. Did you use virtualdrawtree?

Just manage, or enforce? (Could you mess it up from outside the object?)

No. I use functions like AddCategory, AddValue, RemoveCategory, RemoveValue.


Not that unusual, I'd say. Basically, it sounds like dsplaying a standard
recordset in a grid or matrix. Having the records divided into categories
adds a little complexity, but nothing unmanageable. It does make life
harder on the display component.

Exactly. The display component...


The most important thing is to keep object layout and screen layout well
separated. On the other hand, a screen layout that matches the object
layout more closely makes for easier programming, not in the least when
you want to allow editing. The lesson in that is that a good design (of
the object layout) pays off.

What do you mean by '2-tier'?

I meant the division between data layer (structure) and display layer.

It doesn't make the program that much slower, it's just more work for me now, but I think it will pay off later.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: D2006 Object inspector component
    ... I'm a treeview kind of guy. ... The most important thing is to keep object layout and screen layout well ... That's because I still don't know what to use to display the data. ...
    (alt.comp.lang.borland-delphi)
  • Re: C++ and Delphi
    ... but the COM interface possibility is what makes it likely that ... > object layout is the same, and extra tables are put at negative ... > This is btw a problem, since FPC doesn't have this layout due to GNU ... > LD not supporting negative offsets. ...
    (comp.lang.pascal.delphi.misc)