[news.eclipse.platform.swt] Re: Trees and Tables

["Grant Gayed" <grant_gayed@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

You aren't overlooking anything, the hierarchy is what it is.  I don't think
there was a specific reason, other than there not being a clear advantage to
them having a common supertype, since usually you know if you have a handle
to a Table vs. a Tree.  SWT does not generally implement extra
classes/interfaces like this, though there have been some requests in the
past for them.  I would suggest logging a Feature Request for this, but
based on previous ones I don't think it would be implemented.  Unless you
have a very compelling use case (?).

Grant


"T. Wilhelm" <t.wilhelm@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:dd9923ea4cf4a9c73867b0054da72eb7$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Hey all,
>
> i have a general question about Trees and Tables. I wondering why Trees
> and Tables are derived from composite and do not have a common base (or
> interface) class where methods like getItemHeight(), getHeaderHeight(),
> getColumn() and so on are placed. In JFace i found a better structured
> hierachy, because there is the
> StructuredViewer->ColumnViewer->Table/TreeViewer.
>
> Maybe i overlooked something? Or is there any good reason for that design?
>
> Thanks alot
> Thomas
>