bufanliu / flexlib

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/flexlib
0 stars 0 forks source link

Sorting TreeGrid causes erroneous results #5

Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 8 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. Open
http://flexlib.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/examples/TreeGrid/TreeGrid_Sample.swf
2. Expand Macromedia and Sector 02 on the left
3. Click the name header to sort, notice how the hierarchy is broken at
this point
4. Click Sector 02 to close it, and notice the run-time error

RangeError: Index '8' specified is out of bounds.
    at mx.collections::ListCollectionView/removeItemAt()
    at flexlib.controls::TreeGrid/closeItemAt()
    at flexlib.controls::TreeGrid/dispatchTreeEvent()
    at
flexlib.controls.treeGridClasses::TreeGridItemRenderer/::disclosureMouseDownHand
ler()

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?

I'm not 100% sure what the expected output should be.  My best guess would
be that the names at each "level" of the heirarchy would be sorted in
alphabetical order, but that the overall structure of the hierarchy remains
the same.  In this example, after sorting with Macromedia and Sector 02
open, I think the order should be:

Adobe
Macromedia
  Sector 01
  Sector 02
    Class 01
    Class 02
  Sector 03
Microsoft
Oracle

Original issue reported on code.google.com by darron.schall on 20 Mar 2007 at 4:02

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
this is a feature i need to implemen, i would like the sorting feature to work, 
the
current Flex Tree dont support that and therefor i think it can be useful :)

for the expected result, that right each level will be sorted independently.

Original comment by yderi...@gmail.com on 24 Mar 2007 at 12:49

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago

Original comment by darron.schall on 5 Apr 2007 at 10:36

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago

Original comment by dmcc...@gmail.com on 26 Dec 2007 at 11:41

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
I downloaded v2.4 of the flexlib...and still noticed this issue...are there any 
plans
on fixing this in the near future?

Original comment by siddharth.balaravi on 14 Mar 2008 at 9:34