🚀 go-pugleaf

Conrad:

Any of the dropdown lists in the inspector that take object types
(like the Frame property of a dialog) will seed with a list of objects
of the appropriate type that are in scope.  If you design a Frame and
add a dialog to it, then you will see a "this" property listed in that
dropdown.

The reference is probably in one of the samples, most of which start
with a Frame and work from there.

-Rich

Conrad Hoesle-Kienzlen wrote:
> 
> Andrew,
> but that is just the point: *not* to have to look for the parent frame. If I
> have to look for the parent frame as that example (and others posted by you
> and Rich)does, then I can't, of course, use a Dialog as a bean, whereas with
> my version I can. As for the focus, I always add a this.requestFocus() after
> the .show() of the dialog. Apart from that, I could not make out *any*
> difference whatsoever (yet) between a dialog that was created with a
> "parent" frame and one that was created with a new frame, in fact, I do not
> understand why the "parent" frame (whatever that is supposed to mean) is
> needed at all. This would mean that an object that does not make use of a
> frame cannot instantiate a dialog at all. What's more, somewhere in the
> documentation it says that you can set the parent frame of a dialog in the
> object inspector. This is not true, at least everytime I tried that, I did
> not have that choice. The frame-entry in the object inspector is a drop-down
> list and it always only gave me the choice of <none>.
> I would be glad if you could clarify this riddle a bit.
> 
> Andrew Bennett wrote:
> 
> > Conrad Hoesle-Kienzlen wrote:
> > >
> > > JBuilder online (and printed) documentation is wrong on Dialogs. It
> > > states that a Dialog must be constructed with a parent frame (and
> > > therefore cannot be made into a bean). This is not necessary. One can
> > > create a new dialog with:
> >
> > This may cause focus related problems - the fact that focus doesn't
> > go back to the original parent after the dialog is closed.
> >
> > The code at ::
> >
> > http://www.borland.com/devsupport/jbuilder/qanda/956.html
> >
> > May be a bit better.  It doesn't involve creation of another
> > object, and is a bit cleaner as a result.  (Option 1, that is)
> >
> > Andrew
> > --
> >   Andrew Bennett
> >   abennett@borland.com
> >
> >   Due to my workload, personal email more than likely won't get a reply.
> >   Support options are detailed at http://www.borland.com/devsupport/
> >   I am unable to answer support questions via email at this time.
> >
> >   Check http://www.borland.com/devsupport/jbuilder/ for FAQs and
> >   additional JBuilder support related help.

-- 

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Rich Wilkman
Senior Quality Assurance Engineer
Borland JBuilder Team

If you see something that looks like an opinion up there,
it's mine and mine alone.

Mail sent to me from the newsgroups won't bounce but will
be ignored.  If I have time, I'll respond, but you  have
a better chance if you confine your posts to the newsgroups
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=