<body><div id="__MailbirdStyleContent" style="font-size: 10pt;font-family: Arial;color: #000000">
Hi!<div><br></div><div>Yes, there is:</div><div><br></div><div>aMorph</div><div> disableLayout: true;</div><div> visible: false.</div><div><br></div><div>Best,</div><div>Marcel</div><div class="mb_sig"></div><blockquote class="history_container" type="cite" style="border-left-style:solid;border-width:1px; margin-top:20px; margin-left:0px;padding-left:10px;">
<p style="color: #AAAAAA; margin-top: 10px;">Am 03.04.2020 17:48:29 schrieb Stéphane Rollandin <lecteur@zogotounga.net>:</p><div style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">> #show/#hide/#visible: reserve space for the hidden morph. However, there <br>> are other scenarios where you do not want to reserve space. (A simple <br>> example would be a list that should only appear iff it has items.)<br><br>You could have such a "removed morph" temporarily #become: a collapsed <br>representation (like a flat invisible morph for a list item), and then <br>swap it back when you need it. I have used that pattern; #become: is fast.<br><br>> <br>> In JS, you can use 'display: none' instead of 'visibility: hidden' to <br>> give the space back to the element's remaining siblings.<br>> <br>> But in Morphic, is there currently any better option than #delete (and <br>> #addMorph:) later?<br>> <br>> <br>> (IMO, delete'n'add is not always the best pattern to do this. You <br>> need to remember the index and owner of the relevant morph for adding it <br>> later.)<br>> <br>> <br>> Provided that I did not overlook any existing features, would you <br>> consider this a useful extension for Morphic?<br><br>No. I think this should be implemented either via specific mophs or via <br>specific layout (probably yet to be invented).<br><br>> <br>> I was thinking of a property (#skipLayout, if you do not have any better <br>> idea) and a convenience method (#nonSkippedSubmorphs) that <br>> rejects suppressed submorphs. TableLayout would need to use this <br>> selector instead of regular #submorphs.<br>> <br>> Or would this break too many existing things that rely on #submorphs?<br><br>Oh, yes, please do not add any logic to #submorphs. It is a plain array <br>and a lot of things rely on this. You can implement a wrapper Morph with <br>all that logic, instead.<br><br>> <br>> <br>> Another approach would be a selector in the TableLayoutProperties <br>> to have all submorphs skipped that are hidden via classical #visible. <br>> But this would be less powerful as you couldn't combine both kinds of <br>> hiding in the same morph. But maybe this would be even better in terms <br>> of avoiding complexity?<br><br>Not a good idea IMO to use a property tag to represent another property. <br>#visible should just be about visibility.<br><br>Best,<br><br>Stef<br><br></div></blockquote>
</div></body>