Comments on: Widgets within Widgets

By: dante hicks

dante hicks — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 08:09:12 +0000

The dual functions were a [n admittedly bad] decision made long ago in Dojo 1.0 … In 2.0 there will be one destroy() and it will destroy tracked children. destroyRecursive() eventually calls destroy() but is provided (iirc) by a mix in class _Contained, so not always present. Sniffing for the function first solves that. My _kill function is likely a close-replacement to not needing to know which to call on a widget.

By: emailtoid.net/i/736ea11b/…

emailtoid.net/i/736ea11b/… — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 13:54:52 +0000

Why can’t you just call destroyRecursive()? Actually, I’m confused about why there are two destroy methods in the first place. When is it useful to destroy a widget but not its nested widgets? TIA.

By: neonstalwart.blogspot.com/

neonstalwart.blogspot.com/ — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 18:02:09 +0000

i usually use dijit._Container and it is not quite as flexible as what you’ve done but it does have some child management functions and you would need to call destroyRecursive to make sure that the descendants are destroyed as well.

By: dante hicks

dante hicks — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 14:26:00 +0000

@nathan – _supportingWidgets is there, yes. Granted in this example we include _templated, but _supportingWidgets is both _private (so no guarantee our added stuff will always stay working) and only present when widgetsInTemplate:true. Not all of our Thingers need _Templated or widgetsInTemplate (added overhead, albeit minimal). This is why I decided to introduce the _addedItems array for just this. If dijit._Widget had this API internally, it would probably just piggyback on the _supportingWidgets array, as they both serve the same purpose.

By: toonetown

toonetown — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 13:44:42 +0000

We add our internally-created widgets to _supportingWidgets and then things “just work” since the base _Widget class cleans all those up.

By: Matthew Weier O'Phinney

Matthew Weier O'Phinney — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 13:33:53 +0000

Awesome post — this is a problem I’ve run into a number of times, and typically created some fairly complex destroyRecursive() functionality for. Your “extra keystrokes” are a ton less than I was using previously. :)