New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Bad Things happen with non-unique markup #97

Closed
yarf opened this Issue Feb 16, 2017 · 4 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@yarf

yarf commented Feb 16, 2017

If the markup for each row is not unique, bad things seem to happen. Here's a slightly adjusted version of your "search" example to demonstrate, where I removed the unique index from the inserted rows: http://codepen.io/anon/pen/MJxNqo

... scroll the table towards the bottom and watch what happens?

@NeXTs

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@NeXTs

NeXTs Feb 16, 2017

Owner

Hello
Hm, indeed
That's because cache condition which was made to avoid unnecessary repaints (for example when call .update(data) while data didn't actually changed). That's a bug which should be fixed so thanks for letting me know but do you really have that much weird table with exact same rows? :)

Owner

NeXTs commented Feb 16, 2017

Hello
Hm, indeed
That's because cache condition which was made to avoid unnecessary repaints (for example when call .update(data) while data didn't actually changed). That's a bug which should be fixed so thanks for letting me know but do you really have that much weird table with exact same rows? :)

@yarf

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@yarf

yarf Feb 16, 2017

using Clusterize to render a (potentially) large amount of "status" information ... there are often rows with identical status ;p

yarf commented Feb 16, 2017

using Clusterize to render a (potentially) large amount of "status" information ... there are often rows with identical status ;p

@NeXTs NeXTs closed this in 69931c7 Feb 19, 2017

@yarf

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@yarf

yarf Feb 19, 2017

Thank-you!

yarf commented Feb 19, 2017

Thank-you!

NeXTs added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 19, 2017

@NeXTs

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@NeXTs

NeXTs Feb 19, 2017

Owner

@yarf oops, use v0.17.4 :)

Owner

NeXTs commented Feb 19, 2017

@yarf oops, use v0.17.4 :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment