This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.
Summary: | One-click boolean editor is not possible in SheetButton | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | platform | Reporter: | Tim Lebedkov <lebedkov> |
Component: | Explorer | Assignee: | _ tboudreau <tboudreau> |
Status: | VERIFIED FIXED | ||
Severity: | blocker | ||
Priority: | P3 | ||
Version: | 3.x | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
Issue Type: | ENHANCEMENT | Exception Reporter: | |
Bug Depends on: | 31896 | ||
Bug Blocks: |
Description
Tim Lebedkov
2003-03-09 21:33:49 UTC
It's a matter of SheetButton (which is used in TTV), preferably enhancement. I reassign to propertysheets. I thought it was a duplicate of other issue but I was not able to find it :) Adding to propsheet rewrite umbrella issue - it's already implemented in a branch (which does not use SheetButton - that will be deprecated) Changing this issue to depend on issue 31896. The new property sheet uses a checkbox, but PropertyPanel (a UI component for displaying a single property) still relies on SheetButton for the time being. The plan is to rewrite PropertyPanel to use the rendering infrastructure from the new property sheet. Probably this will come after some revision of the current support for properties - I tried a prototype, but it involved many horrible hacks because PropertyPanel knows nothing about Node.Property objects, only about PropertyModel, which doesn't provide all of the methods the propertysheet rendering infrastructure needs. Better to sort the mess out than hack further - the new propertysheet already contains some hacks to abide by the rather worn and tired existing API. Note that HIE has decreed that our boolean editor shall be a pair of radio buttons - this will go in in the property panel rewrite branch merge. I will try to include some flexibility so that, e.g., a property panel can specify that it prefers a checkbox. Property panel rewrite branch merged. ok |