If I've got, for example, 10 rows merged together in a column as one covered cell, then try to merge, say, 3 rows in the middle of those 10 rows as another covered cell, it breaks up the remaining rows into individual cells instead of splitting them into two smaller covered cells (which is what I would have expected) and changes the style of all 10 cells to the style of the new 3 cell covered cell (which is completely unexpected).
Is this behaviour something that might change in a future version, or should I start programming a workaround for this problem for myself (which, I assume, would entail manually looping through the collection of covered cells and modifying the one to be broken apart as necessary)?
ADAdministrator Syncfusion Team April 11, 2003 10:41 AM
We don't have any discussed plans of modifying the current covered cell behavior.
In the upcoming 1.6 release, in addition to the current CoveredCells, there will be a concept of merged cells, where cells containing like values are merged into a bigger single cell. Merge cells will behave as you described above. If the cells rows 1 to 10 in column 1 have teh same value, you would see 1 cell. If you then modified row 5 column 1 to a different value, the merge cells would end at row 4 and start back up with rows 6 to 10.
So, if you are covering cells to hide the same value, then I think using the new Merge Cells will give you the effect you want.
If you really need the covered cells, then coding your work around is probably the way to go. Using the Model.CoveredRanges.Ranges.AnyRangeIntersects and the Model.CoveredRanges.Ranges.GetRangesIntersecting methods should be of help.
MSMaxim Software SystemsApril 11, 2003 11:06 AM
When is version 1.6 slated to be released?
ADAdministrator Syncfusion Team April 11, 2003 05:09 PM