A change of behavior between two versions of SmartGWT in how ValuesManager saves a ListGridRecord is preventing my application from being able to save any data with ListGridRecords when using the later version.
Scenario:
A Window has a ListGrid that uses a ValuesManager bound to a DataSource we'll call Foo that has 3 fields: bar (String), baz (String) and bork (Integer).
The ListGrid has one record in it with the following attributes:
bar=abcde
baz=fghij
bork=4
When calling valuesManager.saveData(), the ValuesManager has a different Map of data depending on the version of SmartGWT. The code blocks below show the result of a valuesManager.getValues() call.
Previous behavior in SmartClient Version: v8.3_2012-11-20:
Behavior with SmartClient Version: v9.0p_2014-02-13
Our app cannot process the "ListGridRecord@2" object, and I do not know how to get the values out of that object. Our app uses custom datasources and does a lot of custom JSON processing. (I'd rather wait for a first reply before going into the details of that, since I want to first understand the reason for the change in the two versions.)
The only variable between the two examples I presented is the version of SmartGWT. I tried a nightly build of 9.0p from 2014-03-02 and I observe the same behavior.
Scenario:
A Window has a ListGrid that uses a ValuesManager bound to a DataSource we'll call Foo that has 3 fields: bar (String), baz (String) and bork (Integer).
The ListGrid has one record in it with the following attributes:
bar=abcde
baz=fghij
bork=4
When calling valuesManager.saveData(), the ValuesManager has a different Map of data depending on the version of SmartGWT. The code blocks below show the result of a valuesManager.getValues() call.
Previous behavior in SmartClient Version: v8.3_2012-11-20:
Code:
{foo={__ref=com.smartgwt.client.widgets.grid.ListGridRecord@1aaa57b, bar=abcde, baz=fghij, bork=4}}
Code:
{foo=com.smartgwt.client.widgets.grid.ListGridRecord@2}
The only variable between the two examples I presented is the version of SmartGWT. I tried a nightly build of 9.0p from 2014-03-02 and I observe the same behavior.
Comment