THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED
On 08/12/2007 at 16:15, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Cinema 4D Version: 10.5
Language(s) : C++ ;
I've looked through all the examples and the light hasn't gone on - I'm having trouble figuring out the simplest way to create the list for my treeview (materials and channel textures).
I thought I could use a GeListHead*, but I can't insert the textures because they're not GeListNodes.
What's the best way to create the list?
TIA for any help.
- Rick -
On 12/12/2007 at 00:06, xxxxxxxx wrote:
I haven't used a TreeView myself but from what I can see from the examples you need a list and an own TreeViewFunctions class. You have to re-define the virtual functions of your TreeViewFunctions class to make it work with your list. Then you pass the list and the TreeViewFunction to SetRoot().
hope this helps a bit
On 12/12/2007 at 00:29, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Well, you can get away with Cinema 4D defaults if the tree is based upon BaseList2D hierarchies (which include GeListNode and GeListHead). Otherwise you need to structure a 'root' class and a 'node' class for the TreeView to work with.
With respect to materials and channel textures - no idea if this is possible by default. It all depends upon what you want to represent in the tree.
The basic principle for 'custom' TreeView hierarchies is to create a root class and a node class. Then you need to create a TreeViewFunctions class and fill in the necessary virtual methods in accordance with the expected functionality.
BaseMaterial is indeed based on BaseList2D so you should be able to construct an appropriate tree from it (it has roots in GeListNode). But it doesn't have an evident GeListHead as root. I would think that, similar to BaseObject, it would be the BaseDocument. The latest cinema4dsdk example (activeobject) makes it a bit more confusing. Most of my TreeViews require custom access to non-C4D structures so I don't completely understand the dance here.
On 13/12/2007 at 13:04, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Thanks guys - that helped a bit. Finally I decided that the SDK examples are there for a reason, rolled up my sleeves and got what I needed out of them. I still think it's unnecessarily complex, but maybe that's the nature of the TreeView class.