Bug 171284 - [Viewers] Please give us a Stateless version of tree viewer.
Summary: [Viewers] Please give us a Stateless version of tree viewer.
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Platform
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: UI (show other bugs)
Version: 3.3   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P3 enhancement with 1 vote (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: Platform UI Triaged CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-01-22 14:48 EST by Mark Levison CLA
Modified: 2019-09-06 16:08 EDT (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Mark Levison CLA 2007-01-22 14:48:55 EST 
While your doing all of this work would you consider providing a version of the tree viewer where you store no state information?

In the product I'm building our engine keeps track of the open/close state, selection etc. In addition results are readonly - so open/close I need make a request of the engine. When its done the work it will hand back a new results set.

Currently when we use the treeviewer and the content provider we have about 150 lines of code just keep the tree state in sync with the results set.

Please give us a stateless version of the tree viewer. When it comes to tackle this enhancement I will propose a model interface.

BTW I know I should file this as a JFace and not SWT bug - but I can't figure out how to get that out of Bugzilla.
Comment 1 Boris Bokowski CLA 2007-01-23 08:37:00 EST 
I don't understand - the only state kept by the tree viewer is the mapping between elements returned by the content provider and the tree items.  We get the expansion state and the current selection from the underlying tree widget.

Have you considered using SWT's Tree directly, without going through TreeViewer?
Comment 2 Boris Bokowski CLA 2009-11-26 09:50:22 EST 
Hitesh is now responsible for watching bugs in the [Viewers] component area.
Comment 3 Eclipse Webmaster CLA 2019-09-06 16:08:36 EDT 
This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet.

If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant.