Re: [Tile-dev] Strawman Tree widget API

[Donal K. F. <don...@ma...>]

Joe English wrote:
> On the other hand, just about as often the source data *doesn't*
> have any notion of a node identifier, so there's an extra burden 
> on the programmer to manufacture one.  This could just be a matter
> of using "#auto" and letting the Tree widget generate one, 
> but still...

Having to mess around with node identifiers was one of the bits that
made using the BWidget tree much more complex when I used it. A scheme
more like the canvas's ids would make much more sense to me for the
simple cases. "Make common things simple..."

> [Brett Schwarz wrote:]
>> Of course, one
>> could just keep a reference to the node id (generated
>> from treeview) and client data in a separate
>> structure, but I kind of like keeping it together.
> That's what you have to do when using the Canvas widget too.

On the canvas, setting bindings (the only kind of callback supported) on 
an item is a separate step from creating the item.

>> $widget exists <nodename>
> Would this still be useful if node IDs weren't user-supplied?

Yes.

Donal.