Wt

I use currently wt-3.3.2.

Hey,

A tristate checkbox will indeed toggle only between checked and unchecked. The partially checked state can only be set through the API. Asfaik this is consistent with what other APIs do, and seems useful in several occasions, but thus not for your use? What behavior are you looking for?

Koen

Koen Deforche wrote:

Asfaik this is consistent with what other APIs do, and seems useful in several occasions, but thus not for your use?

In Qt you can override that behaviour via virtual method QAbstractButton::nextCheckState

Hi Koen,

Koen Deforche wrote:

A tristate checkbox will indeed toggle only between checked and unchecked. The partially checked state can only be set through the API. Asfaik this is consistent with what other APIs do, and seems useful in several occasions, but thus not for your use? What behavior are you looking for?

>

I have some configuration which can be marked as unused (unchecked), disabled (partially checked) or used (checked). Thus a TriState checkbox perfectly fits here. But the user should be able to select the states. A WAbstractButton::nextCheckState() function would be perfect with the following code:

Wt::CheckState WAbstractButton::nextCheckState()
{
   switch(currentState)
   {
   case Wt::Unchecked:
      return Wt::PartiallyChecked:
   case Wt::PartiallayChecked:
      return Wt::Checked:
   case Wt::Checked:
      return Wt::Unchecked:
   }
}

Maybe add a new NextCheckStateRole which can implement this nextCheckState() functionalitiy?

Unfortunately, the reason for this seems to be that the native browser implementation of tri-state checkboxes (which is available and used in some browsers, namely the 'indeterminate' state), does not offer this ability. We would of course like to switch to the native support as it becomes available in more browsers.

But I believe the feature could still be implemented using some setting such as 'setCyclePartiallyChecked(true)' which would implement the correct cycling behavior in JavaScript. If you agree to that we can assign it as a feature request for 3.3.4 (or perhaps 3.3.5 because we can't keep on dragging our feet for a release!)

Hi Koen,

yes that is fine for me. Currently I have implemented this with checkboxes in 2 columns. But a working tristate checkbox is preferred from my side.

Regarding a 3.3.4 release: we are planning a new release of our software in april, is there a chance to have a stable 3.3.4 release? We currently use 3.3.2 and I want to jump to a official 3.3.4!