Unreliable Button visibility control

[Kool Aid]

I decided to improve the UI of my PIOs by hiding not only irrelevant parameters but also irrelevant buttons, based on the situation & user choice.

So, I have now tried function vsoWidgetSetVisible(), with interesting results. Unfortunately in the Chinese sense of the word.

Contrary to the advice in Vlado's learned article about Custom Shape Panes

Parametric Custom Shape Pane

the function generally seems to work without setting

result := SetObjPropVS(12, TRUE); {kObjXHasCustomWidgetVisibilities}

This is good, because that setting disables the SetParameterVisibility() call!

However, under this condition the button visibility is unreliable and now I have one PIO in which it does not work at all.

All in all, this seems to be something of a dead end altogether: even with the above setting, button visibility is totally unaffected by anything in this particular PIO. Regardless of anything, buttons remain visible.

Any experiences on this matter?

Edited November 11, 2009 by Kool Aid

[Kool Aid]

I take no-one else has encountered this problem?

More info: at least in one PIO hiding the button misbehaves quite frequently, in some others only on occasion.

Compilation mode may have an effect, but not sure yet.

[Guest Frank Brault]

If you submit an example, I try to corroborate it on this end.

[Kool Aid]

Frank,

Thanks for the kind offer, but since this is one of those ?unreproducible results?, an example would hardly do much good. Not even two examples, because ? who knows ? the ?working? PIO might just decide not to work when you test it, so the conclusion would be that widgets cannot be made invisible except when parameters cannot be made invisible.

Widget visibility per se works very well when parameter visibility is disabled via

CONST kObjXHasCustomWidgetVisibilities = 12;

and

result := SetObjPropVS(kObjXHasCustomWidgetVisibilities, TRUE);

But occasionally one can both have and eat one's parameter cake. Having it is more than the corpus of documentation suggests, so why do I complain! There's no pledge of consistency, is there?

OK: I attach a set of files anyway. They are only proof of the documented situation (ie. buttons are not supposed to go into hiding.)

(The good folks in Maryland, the Home of the Chicken, are working VERY hard to make communication as difficult as possible: the extension ?txt? means ?zip?. As everyone, except Chickens, would have guessed.)

(TIMEOUT!)

Meanwhile in another PIO:

Now you see it:

Now you don't:

(TIMEOUT!)

No luck with the Attachment.

Phew: it took only two hours to get this through! Without the Attachment.

EDIT

Another hour or so and even the Attachment seems to be there!

Edited November 24, 2009 by Kool Aid