diff options
| author | Xavier Morel <xmo@openerp.com> | 2011-10-04 17:10:31 +0200 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Xavier Morel <xmo@openerp.com> | 2011-10-04 17:10:31 +0200 |
| commit | f164496dc436918855290ed36fcea6d06566975f (patch) | |
| tree | 985d7a7b00bf2ccd736c2dee506f2f13beba679c /addons/analytic_user_function/analytic_user_function.py | |
| parent | 68a0858c9c5362bf329ba5c9b8111291ca3c2dc0 (diff) | |
[FIX] correctly call form field's update_dom in all cases in editable listview
Form fields are extended/replaced in editable list view in order to
handle @invisible and @tree_invisible correctly in editable-list-form
context (base semantics of @invisible are different between listview
and formview, formview's @invisible is listview's @tree_invisible, and
instead of removing element from visible DOM listview's @invisible
only hides the element but it keeps the space it's taking).
As a result, listview editable needs to override Widget.update_dom for
pretty much all form widgets, in order to manage this difference in
behavior.
In case of @tree_invisible, it did so correctly setting and unsetting
its stuff and calling this.super() to execute the widget's actual
update_dom triggers **but it did not do so when the element was really
visible**.
As a result, in editable listview elements would never appear required
(blue background), invalid (red background) or disabled (gray),
although they were correctly set up, because the display layer was
never updated.
bzr revid: xmo@openerp.com-20111004151031-65o0q8e86op7kdks
Diffstat (limited to 'addons/analytic_user_function/analytic_user_function.py')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions
