When creating a RowRenderer with a factory, the control is not editable

[benshoe]

Example:

RowRenderer<SomeClass> rr = new RowRenderer(SomeClass.class);
rr.column(BigDecimal.class, "property").factory(row -> {
Text<BigDecimal> ctrl = new Text<>(BigDecimal.class);
ctrl.bind().to(row, "property");
return ctrl;
}
).editable();

Without the 'editable()' method, the control is shown in read-only mode.

[benshoe]

Hi, would this be a valid unit test for this bug?

public class RowRendererTest {

public class TestObject {

	BigDecimal m_property;

	public BigDecimal getProperty() {
		return m_property;
	}

	public void setProperty(BigDecimal property) {
		m_property = property;
	}
}

@Test
public void testEditableWithFactory() {
	RowRenderer<TestObject> rr = new RowRenderer<>(TestObject.class);
	rr.column(BigDecimal.class, "property").factory(row -> {
			Text2<BigDecimal> ctrl = new Text2<>(BigDecimal.class);
			ctrl.bind().to(row, "property");
			return ctrl;
		}
	).editable();

	ColumnDef<TestObject, ?> column = rr.getColumn(0);
	Assert.assertTrue("Column is editable", column.isEditable());

	rr.column(BigDecimal.class, "property").factory(row -> {
			Text2<BigDecimal> ctrl = new Text2<>(BigDecimal.class);
			ctrl.bind().to(row, "property");
			return ctrl;
		}
	);

	column = rr.getColumn(1);
	Assert.assertTrue("Column is also editable", column.isEditable());
}

}

[fjalvingh]

No, the second part is incorrect. You would have to validate that, after a render, the control that was rendered was editable. In this case you're just checking that the variable inside the column definition has been set - both your checks are the same.

You can either create a Selenium test (not that difficult, there is lots of infra) or make a test calling renderRow() of the RowRenderer. You would then get, inside the ColumnContainer, a call to add that control that was created. You can add a check for that.

[benshoe]

I have created a pull request for this issue.