* Add the basic ContentSwitcher widget
* Docstring tidy
* Add a visible_content property to the ContentSwitcher
* Clarify that children of ContentSwitcher with no IDs get ignored
* Simplify setting the display value
* Add the start of an example ContentSwitcher for the docs
* Tweak the example layout to better fit in small spaces
* Add the content switcher to the API docs
* Add a guide entry for the ContentSwitcher
This one is a wee bit more involved than most other widget entries in the
guide in that it doesn't obviously do anything itself, but needs
developer-input to make it do something useful. As such the outline here
isn't as clean as it could be, but I think it conveys everything necessary
without getting too complicated.
* Add the reactive attribute table to the ContentSwitcher guide
* Update the README
* Add a refresh after everything has been flipped in the switcher
As noted in the code, this should not be necessary and I don't believe it
has anything to do with this code. I would suspect some lower-level issue
with flipping between different widgets within a container. I need to find a
way to make an isolated reproduction that isn't about this particular
widget. Meanwhile though this works with the refresh().
* Swap current from var to reactive
This solves the explicit refresh issue, but only because the refresh is
implied due to the use of a reactive over a var. As such this sort of
addresses #1979 by ignoring the issue rather than diving into it.
I still suspect that I shouldn't need to do this, and that perhaps there's a
refresh issue when you flip display. So I'll keep #1979 kicking around and
at some point see if I can recreate in isolation.
* Add unit tests for the content switcher
* Add snapshot tests for the ContentSwitcher
* Clarify that an exception can be thrown on a bad ID
* Try and help other Pythons
* Add a pause at the end of the second switcher snapshot test
I'm getting a lot of fails in CI; none of them are actual problems.
Hopefully this will cure it.
* Paaaaaaaaause
More of a test than anything else really. My particular snapshot test is
failing but kinda randomly in each environment each time -- sometimes
Windows, sometimes GNU/Linux, different Python versions.
So... yeah, let's try this and see if it makes it through; otherwise I may
need to rethink this.
* New pause
So it turns out that _ doesn't do anything any more; and instead there's a
"wait:<n>" syntax! So let's give that a try.
* Learning my alphabet...
* Fix a typo in the docs.
Co-authored-by: Rodrigo Girão Serrão <5621605+rodrigogiraoserrao@users.noreply.github.com>
* Add missing full stop.
Co-authored-by: Rodrigo Girão Serrão <5621605+rodrigogiraoserrao@users.noreply.github.com>
* Add a missing word
Co-authored-by: Rodrigo Girão Serrão <5621605+rodrigogiraoserrao@users.noreply.github.com>
* Try a longer wait on the switcher
I'm starting to suspect that this doesn't come down to a timing issue;
especially given that the snapshot report seems to be showing some oddity in
the length of the vertical scrollbar. But... I want to be as sure as
possible so let's double the length of the wait.
Bit a bit of me is starting to wonder if I've somehow managed to create the
perfect storm for scrollbars and you don't always get the same result every
time.
Seems unlikely, but if it's not timing it's that or lots of cosmic rays.
* Test a longer pause on the content switcher test
The idea here being that it takes 200ms for the button to pop again.
* Refresh the snapshots
This time. THIS TIME!
* Experiment: is the issue the same name for two tests?
* Experiment: drop the different source files, try terminal size
Having got over the issue of the button not ending up in the same state,
we're stuck with the scrollbar having different sizes. Having tried other
options let's go with tweaking the terminal size.
* Do a little less work when changing current
Rather than set everything invisible then the new one visible, every time
current is changed, instead just make sure everything is invisible up front
and then just swap the affected children each time.
This does mean that if someone messes with the children under the hood they
may see oddness happening, but less work while being less defensive seems
fair here.
---------
Co-authored-by: Rodrigo Girão Serrão <5621605+rodrigogiraoserrao@users.noreply.github.com>
There's a couple of other types in the public interface of Tree that should
be teased out, and it feels odd to have one type in one file and a bunch of
others in another. So this sets us up for having them all the same place.
This should make it easier for the reader to find related information.
While it's arguably not the most useful widget, it's in the code, exported,
and can be seen by people; I feel it should be in the documentation. I've
ensured that it also links to Placeholder given it sort of is a Placeholder
and so people might arrive at it first and it makes sense to redirect them
to something more comprehensive.
A large part of the code to go with this is to show off a radio set; I feel
it makes sense to use the same code for both bits of documentation given
that a radio button only really makes sense inside a radio set.
The idea here is that there is a single file for the nav for all the docs,
both online and offline. The nav will be the full online nav in all its blog
glory, and then the build system will strip out the nav items relating to
the blog when building the offline version.
There's a wrinkle or two still in here; the main one being that when doing a
docs-serve, it seems that the cleaning up of the online nav doesn't happen
when you Ctrl-C out of the server. I'm not 100% sure of the cause of
this (there could be a couple of different reasons).
For now... I'm ensuring that the online/offline nav files are excluded from
git. It would be nice to find out how best to always ensure that the online
nav file is removed so nobody attempting to update the docs gets confused
about what to edit.
