now. For the moment I have kept aside my home-made selector system in
favour of simply keeping an ArrayList of element IDs. I know the IDs
of the elements I'm creating because as I create the elements I am
giving them and ID and the storing that in a simple
ArrayList<Integer>. Then, later when I want to "select" those elements
I just loop through the array list and call DOM.getElementByID(ID)
method. This seems to be ok for me because getElementById is a native
browser function and so one would hope that it's implemented very
efficiently, and also on any given page I will have at most about 80
of these selectable elements. The performance cost is cheap.
On Jun 24, 3:36 pm, Chris Lercher <cl_for_mail...@gmx.net> wrote:
> On Jun 24, 1:08 pm, Paul Schwarz <paulsschw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > But getting back to GWTQuery, it looks interesting, but now that I've
> > solved my "Element selector woes" why else should I delve into
> > GWTQuery?
>
> No need to do that, but GWTQuery provides the easy selector syntax you
> mentioned in your first post. So it's very suitable to find elements
> in an "unknown" part of the DOM.
>
> However - especially if you build the DOM via GWT - you can also hold
> direct references to your elements, and put them in ArrayLists etc.,
> if you can afford the bit of extra runtime memory for these
> references. Then you don't have to search them anymore.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
No comments:
Post a Comment