|
Would there be any way you would be able to bind the Palette background with the Fill background using relative resources?
Too much of heaven can bring you underground
Heaven can always turn around
Too much of heaven, our life is all hell bound
Heaven, the kill that makes no sound
modified on Friday, August 26, 2011 2:29 PM
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the Palette is a collection of ResourceDictionary objects, each of which contains a single brush component, so there is no palette "background" to bind to.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I made the decision to switch away from the WPF Toolkit to Visiblox. In less than 1 day, I got all the charts working the way I wanted. I fought with the WPF Toolkit for more than a week, and it was still not right.
Good riddance WPF Toolkit. What a steaming pile...
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: Visiblox
Makes sense. Use whatever supports our requirements.
In defense of the toolkit, its not too bad.
I wonder why they have not been upgrading it though.
Too much of heaven can bring you underground
Heaven can always turn around
Too much of heaven, our life is all hell bound
Heaven, the kill that makes no sound
|
|
|
|
|
Abhinav S wrote: In defense of the toolkit, its not too bad.
Until you start to color outside the lines. I've NEVER experienced a time when I didn't need to do something that was beyond the in-the-box capabilities of of a chosen framework/library. The fact that it's near impossible with the Toolkit answers your next question:
Abhinav S wrote: I wonder why they have not been upgrading it though.
Because they know it's crap from a real-world standpoint.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
|
|
|
|
|
I used a WPF Toolkit DataGrid.
I'd like to move cell in a column with mouse.
There are a lot of examples about the drag & drop row but nothing for drag & drop of cell.
How can I do to drag & drop cell in a column ?
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Hope the title is OK. Didn't know how to put it any better.
I am looking here for some background information, opinions if you will. I know how to code them.
But I can't get my head around why sometimes things are done one way and sometimes the other.
If you read WPF books (mostly) they teach you to implement RoutedUICommands.
So in short, to have a static class with commands, commandbindings in XAML and some codebehind.
If you read some of the MVVM articles on this site or this article http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/dd419663.aspx[^].
They implement classes with ICommand interface and/or a RelayCommand : ICommand class and put some command handling in the ViewModel
So, when and why, pros and cons, of using one or the other. This is what I hope to hear from you.
|
|
|
|
|
You should always write WPF code the MVVM way. It just produces cleaner, more organized and more efficient code. WPF and MVVM are really a match made in heaven. Once you get your MVVM framework situated, MVVM isn't all that difficult. People who don't want to take a couple of months to learn it and set up a framework are the only ones who make a big deal about how "hard and complicated" it is. If you try write a WPF the non MVVM way, you'll end up with a mess of spaghetti code.
|
|
|
|
|
Very well, I agree that MVVM is a good pattern.
But when not using RoutedUICommand class you loose the bubbling and tunneling, right?
This wil not get me into problems?
|
|
|
|
|
RelayCommand is really kind of required for MVVM. It allows you to define the CanExecute & Execute handlers as part of the RelayCommand object itself. With other types of command implementations, you need to add them to the CommandBindings collection which you don't really have access to in MVVM since the CommandBindingsCollection is part of the window and not the VM. You don't need bubbling and tunneling in VMs. Its mostly handling clicks and such.
|
|
|
|
|
Hm, make good sense to me.
Thx. 
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, one other thing I can clear up for you... bubbling and tunneling is really only useful in controls IMO. You may have thought about using them to communicate between a child view and the parent, but that is really not the recommended pattern in MVVM. Most frameworks will include some sort of messenger service that basically lets you send async messages around to anybody who cares to listen for that specific message.
|
|
|
|
|
SledgeHammer01 wrote: If you try write WPF the non MVVM way, you'll end up with a mess of spaghetti code.
FTFY...
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
|
|
|
|
|
Seriously? WPF seems way cleaner then MFC or Winforms. Sounds like you need a better MVVM framework  .
|
|
|
|
|
|
The best framework is one you write yourself
No joke. This is exactly what I did. There are a lot of popular frameworks out there: MVVM Light, Cinch, etc, but I've never been a fan of grabbing a bunch of open source libraries and getting them to work together. By writing it yourself, you learn MVVM and you know how stuff works inside. Imagine if you used Cinch and found some issue? Sascha is very active on CodeProject, but you never know what could happen down the road. Personally I like real light-weight stuff. So I pretty much have a full light-weight MVVM framework + light-weight DI container and don't have any of the Silverlight fluff that other libraries have.
|
|
|
|
|
I am not a fan of just grabbing a framework
either. At least you have to know the concept of what is happening in there. Otherwise when you will run into bug of the framework you will get stuck.
I am now in the process of making this decision. I know MVVM is the way to go. But I think I will start with my own implementation to see before I get involved in a framework.
Do you know this framework?
<a href="http://www.codeproject.com/KB/WPF/CatelPart0WhyChoose.aspx">Catel - Part 0 of n: Why choose Catel?</a>[<a href="http://www.codeproject.com/KB/WPF/CatelPart0WhyChoose.aspx" target="_blank" title="New Window">^</a>]
It’s a relative newcomer. What do you think of it?
|
|
|
|
|
I am developing an application for a project, and it requires many different features that each has to be addressed in a separate window....
so it should be built on something like a (next//back) hierarchy. This is what I've been doing:
**************************************
Parent par;
public Subclass(Parent var)
{
par = var;
par.hide()
this.show()
}
public void getback()
{
Parent.show()
this.close()
}
**************************************
the problem is, windows pop-up in different locations, and its generally unattractive... is there a better way to handle things in one window, or perhaps spawn windows at a specific location?
thank you
|
|
|
|
|
I siggest you read up on navigation[^]
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
I usually have everything in user controls, not in their own forms, so navigation from one to the next simply iterates through a collection of user controls - making one visible and showing the other.
depending on the complexity of the project, and the likelihood of re-use, you could easily develop a simple framework to support this
A quick search for Wizards could be in order too - as this is the paradigm you're talking about, I think
|
|
|
|
|
I hate wizrd based UIs, even with a small process you spend so much time catering for edge cases it is a painful.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
I have a style on my datagrid to disable a DataGridRow based on a property binding. This makes the row unselectable, which is what I want. However, I am still able to select the disabled rows using at least 2 other ways. The first is if I use a dragging motion between two enabled rows that surround the disabled row. The second is if I click on the "select all" button on the top left of the datagrid. Is there a way to make specific rows completely unselectable?
This is what I currently have:
<DataGrid.RowStyle>
<Style TargetType="{x:Type DataGridRow}">
<Style.Triggers>
<DataTrigger Binding="{Binding DisableMe}" Value="True">
<Setter Property="IsEnabled" Value="False" />
</DataTrigger>
</Style.Triggers>
</Style>
</DataGrid.RowStyle>
|
|
|
|
|
You can try setting the IsHitTestVisibleProperty to false
<DataGrid.RowStyle>
<Style TargetType="{x:Type DataGridRow}">
<Style.Triggers>
<DataTrigger Binding="{Binding DisableMe}" Value="True">
<Setter Property="IsEnabled" Value="False" />
<Setter Property="IsHitTestVisible" Value="False">
</DataTrigger>
</Style.Triggers>
</Style>
</DataGrid.RowStyle>
But the problem is that the Hyperlink will also not work with this.
you can check the reference here[^]
The Second solution will be to use your style same way
But just change the Trigger of IsSelected to Multitrigger & Check for the IsEnabled for true like this
<MultiTrigger>
<MultiTrigger.Conditions>
<Condition Property="IsSelected" Value="True"/>
<Condition Property="IsEnabled" Value="True"/>
</MultiTrigger.Conditions>
<Setter Property="Opacity" TargetName="BackgroundRectangle" Value="0.5"/>
</MultiTrigger>
this way the problem you stated that you can select it using SelectAll will be solved & Hyperlinks will also work.
But in both these solutions when you check the SelectedItems Collection it will contain that row as well with other rows.
Changing circumstances require changing attitudes.
"Challenges are what make life interesting ;
overcoming them is what makes life meaningful." Mark Twain
"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting different results.” — Rita Mae Brown
|
|
|
|
|
Hello,
I have a base class "A", and five other classes which inherit from "A".
"A" have public properties so does the other five classes.
What i want to create is a GUI thru which the user will be able to modify the properties of the five classes.
The straightforward way is to create five GUI's for each one of the classes, in the GUI will be an edit box for each property and some acknowledge button.
But this seems to me like a hard unnecessary work.
So what i want to do is:
To create some how a class which will receive one of my five classes and he will create the GUI for him on the fly according to the number pubic properties that the class have.
I hope i explained my self clearly enough.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
thats what a property grid does.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
