@phillipk Why not? The DataGrid is fast. It's item renderers need to be initialized which does take time depending on how many there are (ie. rows * cols).
sorry, that makes no sense. maybe your measuring isn't accurate. based on your evidence then people who only need 2000 rows should put that in a 10x loop to make it go faster.
(or, did I miss something?)
I suspect you're measuring differently the first time or something similar
Very impressive!
renboy2 2 years ago
Do you have a link to your example?
cisnky 2 years ago
@cisnky You can find it on my blog.
jlward4th 2 years ago
totally makes sense now. It's still impressive. Now I know--do not use the datagrid
phillipk 2 years ago
@phillipk Why not? The DataGrid is fast. It's item renderers need to be initialized which does take time depending on how many there are (ie. rows * cols).
jlward4th 2 years ago
I'm just joking around. It's far from the worst component. And, it's efficient at only slowing down based on what you see.
I guess my joke was that you're using the DG... and a huge dataset to stress the device. How's a homemade sort going to perform? WAY better?
phillipk 2 years ago
Sorry I wasn't very clear in the video. Once the DataGrid is initialized it then renders faster for subsequent loads. Make sense?
jlward4th 2 years ago
sorry, that makes no sense. maybe your measuring isn't accurate. based on your evidence then people who only need 2000 rows should put that in a 10x loop to make it go faster.
(or, did I miss something?)
I suspect you're measuring differently the first time or something similar
phillipk 2 years ago