[RTM] Removed dependency on setScrollableView**()

[renaudcerrato]

setScrollableView(View) and its matching xml attribute umanoScrollableView may easily be replaced by simply looping over the slidable view's childrens. This allow for a cleaner API, for example when working with scrollable fragments as slidable view.

[tokudu]

This is a bad idea. You are effectively going through the entire view hierarchy. The performance would be pretty bad for large list views.

[renaudcerrato]

In 99% of cases, the scrollable view will be at the root. The main advantage is that the slidable content shouldn't have to be static anymore: the current implementation can't easily handle dynamic fragments as slidable contents... Using that simple trick, you can effectively swipe your content dynamically.

BTW, that's how Flipboard's BottomSheet is doing.

[tokudu]

Interesting, I see your point. Though, as far as I can tell you are calling canScrollVertically recursively, so if you have a large number nested viewgroups, this would hinder the performance as well, no?

[renaudcerrato]

Sure, the performance will degrade if the scrollable view is deeply nested. But as I said, in 99.9% of cases the depth won't go above 1 or 2. IMO, the benefits of having dynamic contents are worth it.

Now, I can use SlidingUpPanelLayout as a generic slidable bottom sheet, from my BottomSheetActivity.

[tokudu]

Ok, cool. Let me digest this and play around with it when I get home tonight. Thanks for the idea and the contribution!

[renaudcerrato]

You're welcome! I'll stick with my fork until then ;)

[renaudcerrato]

As a side note: we could add a simple switch to explicitly enable (or disable) that feature in case the user knows there will be no scrollable content.

[tokudu]

I'm still debating this. I tested it a bunch and I was really close to merging this, but then I thought about WebViews, which is where this approach doesn't work well. They could be really complex layouts with lots of children & sub children, which could lead to decreased performance. Thoughts?