WebListBox - Disppearing Row Content

Feedback Case Number: feedback://showreport?report_id=63293

Hi all,

I ran into an issue with the WebListBox. When you try to refresh a WebListBox (by removing all previously added rows and then populating it with new, fresh rows), only some of the rows will display if a sort has been applied to the table. You can see this in action:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfUAs0w6Efk

Any thoughts, ideas or suggestions on how to work around this bug?

Much appreciated! :slight_smile:

This is probably related to a bug I reported in November: feedback://showreport?report_id=62772 I couldn’t find a workaround other than to not use listbox sorting…

2 Likes

I’ve put in some requests to disable the listbox sorting, bring back the header pressed event, remove the ugly “diagonal loading content and scrolling out of range” lines, and allow all content to be loaded at once.

feedback://showreport?report_id=60084
feedback://showreport?report_id=61765

2 Likes

Not an elegant solution but you could disable the headers (potentially align your own header labels if need be) - or switch to WebContainers (but they also have some slowness and bugs currently)

I’m afraid while Web2.0 is released it still needs a lot of love before it can even be a replacement for Web1.0

Xojo is planned to be dog-fooding with a Feedback Web App at some point. We’re still missing actual responsive layouts or auto-layout, drag and drop, etc… No clue when we’re going to see any of this either. Kinda feel left in the dark at the moment on this actually. Maybe @Geoff_Perlman or @Greg_O_Lone can chime in. My fear is it’s off the roadmap since it is marked as shipped, and Android and whatnot is going to take focus rather than finishing out what needs to be completed in Web2.0

2 Likes

This is your assumption and unfortunately it happened in the path so I understand where you are coming from, but I think Web is too important for Xojo and the glitches too obvious to be ignored. So let’s stay optimistic :wink:

1 Like

Hi Brock,

Thanks for the idea! Hmm, well, that actually would work, so I just might have to do that in the meanwhile… :wink:

Yes, I hope that they can get these bugs worked out soon! The sorting issue is a real bummer, as it kind of limits what one can do with Xojo Web in the meanwhile. It’s so close to being a brilliant option for developing web apps quickly and easily.

2 Likes

as far as I understood (from the cases I opened): some fixes are solved but didn’t make it into a point release yet, so there is (realistic) hope for the next major release ;-). But patience isn’t my strength either, please don’t get me wrong.

Definitely. I had to develop the other day something really, really quickly and had different options (non xojo options too), but I went down the Xojo path, and I was impressed how quickly I achieved the goal. If they don’t stop now, I see great potential for Web 2.

2 Likes

I agree completely. So much potential, but just a little but short at the moment!

2 Likes

I’m concerned about the speed of apps. The showcase app that is done in Web 2.0 seems slow and clunky to me. I have apps in web 1.0 that do similar things and are quite a bit faster. That has been enough for me to be discouraged from attempting any new projects for web in Xojo atm. Luckily I don’t have a real need to update or build any apps and it’s all nice to haves right now. Hoping for something improved later this year that will get me excited about it again.

I can’t second that. Web 2 dramatically increased performance and stability for me (for those things working as described). Of course you have to think a bit of how you are designing an app for web, as it is not a desktop app. 3000 lines load less fast in a web app, and that applies to all web development platforms. Plus latency will always remain an issue for globally available apps, unless you have a workload balancing to each region in place.

Glad to hear that your app is working faster and more stable. I am only going by what I have seen with the showcase app. I have yet to do much more than run an example or two and try briefly to convert an old app of mine. The conversion process was going to end up being a rewrite so I put it off.

Is the showcase app fast for you? It feels sluggish and clunky to me even though it seems like a fairly straightforward app. It could be how or where it’s hosted and maybe it doesn’t have anything to do with web 2 directly. I still plan on waiting to see how things progress.

1 Like

No, it is very(!) slow here in Germany and I’m getting all the time a “We are having trouble communicating with the server. Please wait a moment while we attempt to reconnect or Reload the page.”

But my own apps are running fast and this on a low budget server with upload.com

@Greg_O_Lone/@Javier_Menendez

What can it be that the Xojo Showcase app is so, so slow in Germany and other regions. Likewise the Web 2.0 demo from @Anthony_G_Cyphers? Is this due to the server?

I assume (too) many users in parallel, latency, pictures, no special optimizations as geo-workload balancing, caching etc, and server probably shared with other apps running.

https://check-host.net/ip-info?host=showcase.xojo.com

Probably a combination of things. My ping times aren’t bad to the server, 45-50ms, so I wouldn’t expect it to be noticeably slower than any other site I visit, but it is.

The latency on mine is likely geography related. My demo server is located in Kansas City, Missouri, which is a central location in the U.S. because 85% of the traffic through my web site is in the U.S. For me, once you get the initial GraffitiWall showing the products with ‘View’ buttons loaded, it’s really fast unless you hit a page with a PopupMenu.

There are, however, still some rough edges to the speed of Web 2.0 that you can see in my demo, which have been reported and are sure to be addressed. These are, in large part, due to the amount of additional content I load in to Web 2.0 to support my components.

1 Like

I agree, I have for instance “cached” the images in the way Xojo is recommending it in the documentation, but I don’t really see a big positive effect. I think that is related to the fact that Xojo wants to make it easy for every user, so that the app with always run with their build-in webserver. However most people will have a proxy server in front of the Xojo Web App (as recommended as well by Xojo).

I believe (not sure though) it would be beneficial if the webserver used as proxy would deal with this caching. Perhaps that’s already possible, but then I am just to dumb to find out how this can be done. What I’m thinking of is similar to the windows dlls, where we can chose to either include them or not. Similarily an option would ne nice “Xojo based caching active” or “Ensure that you are caching the following folders via your own webserver”.

1 Like

I actually use a fully external traditional server for serving static content. It’s how the framework does certain things that causes the slowdowns in my case.

1 Like

Yeah, that’s my impression too, and I was probably not clear enough. I can imagine that the framework itself might have bits as well which could be (better) cached by the proxy server.

As for the pictures: I followed these advices: https://docs.xojo.com/UserGuide:Web_App_Optimization
They work fine, after a user session was loaded once, but the initial load (aka icons in a menubar) is too slow, compared to other solutions. Not a big thing, but noticeable.

Overall I’m already quite happy with the performance. Locally it is extremely fast, but on my cheap linux boxes it is a less performant. But overall I think we are easily falling in the trap to use too many data, as it is so comparably easy on Web2. What I want to say: we probably tempt to realize stuff in Xojo Web 2, which we would not even try in other languages.

1 Like

Oh, I’m very happy with Web 2.0 compared to Web 1.0. There’s still some issues to work out, but as developers we should be able to understand that bugs happen and improvements come over time. Either way, we’ve derailed this thread enough.

1 Like