Opened 14 years ago
Closed 13 years ago
#2932 closed defect (worksforme)
Dijit: think about removeChild()/addChild()
Reported by: | bill | Owned by: | Adam Peller |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | high | Milestone: | 0.9 |
Component: | Dijit | Version: | 0.4.2 |
Keywords: | Cc: | ||
Blocked By: | Blocking: |
Description
- removeChild()/addChild() (in Container.js) are confusing names because they seem like they refer to adding/removing dom nodes but actually they refer to widgets. Maybe addChildWidget()/removeChildWidget() ?
- should removeChild() destroy the child widget, or just detach the child from the parent? If it destroys the child then we should rename it to destroyChild / destroyChildWidget()
This is exposed for stuff like the X key to destroy a tab.
Change History (3)
comment:1 Changed 14 years ago by
Component: | General → Dijit |
---|
comment:2 Changed 13 years ago by
Milestone: | → 0.9 |
---|
comment:3 Changed 13 years ago by
Resolution: | → worksforme |
---|---|
Status: | new → closed |
Note: See
TracTickets for help on using
tickets.
removeChild() should just detach, like it does now.
So the only issue is the method names (*Child() vs. *ChildWidget?()). I'm fine with the names as they are. If we did changes the names it would have to be across the board, including stuff like StackContainer::selectChild() etc.
Adam, objections to just closing this?