DataGrid Optimization question

[Bob Sneidar]

I was one of the most vocal proponents of some kind of table object, because making one from scratch was sooo much trouble, and anything purporting to be database capable just HAD to have one! So I for one am very thankful for the Datagrid, although learning to work with them properly was almost as much trouble as learning Revolution itself. I am still constantly going back and referring to documentation on how to do one thing or another, and work with behaviors in general. Powerful, but very non-intuitive. 

Still, a data grid is way better than what we had before, a text field that could be kludged into some kind of table looking (but not behaving) sort of object that was really just a tab delimited list. 

So Thanks Rev for the Data Grid. And yes I agree that a table display object that was as native as a field or a button would have been nicer. 

Bob


> <snip>

> THis evolution started with the more frequent usage of properties as data
> containers.... away from the hypercard metaphore (all the data is in fields
> within cards and "find" finds it all..).
> 
> 2) it is a big step AWAY from the hypercard metaphore, because for the first
> time... the find does not work anymore on data that is created using a
> standard object palette.. whouaouu... that is biiiigg!
> 
> 4) so to move ahead and stay coherent with the hypercard metaphor, runrev
> does need a dataObject which is CONSISTENT (visible like datagrids, or not
> visible like datagrids without the group & fields overhead, working with
> find). What do people around think about that?? (I can only hope that runrev
> listens to that if I'm not alone thinking that aloud..)
> <snip>