Hi Rich!
Short answer: No. Long-winded answer:
...
The problem arises when you use that same window to navigate to the original folder whose shadow you expanded earlier. If you recall, an object can only be inserted once. Consequently, when you expand the original folder, it will have no subfolders because their records were used above as children of the shadow. Here's a demonstration: open your boot drive in tree view, then expand these folders: Desktop->Computer->Drives. Notice that your boot drive is missing from Drives - that's because it's record was already inserted at the top as the root record for this tree.
It's a zero-sum game at best, and hopelessly confusing if you don't understand the mechanics of why stuff "disappears" in tree view. I'd rather not go there. Instead, I'll see if there are any non-kludgy alternatives.
That is a superb explanation, at least I understand the wider limitation. Thank you sir!
I have never actually encountered the boot drive example you walked through, so that is indeed very clear now.
However, what I'm curious about is the following:
1) what happens if the object shadow I am trying to show does NOT actually point to a folder object that is a CHILD of the top-level object
- so my boot drive is G:, and while opening a folder in Xview which is a CHILD folder of drive G: I want to display the contents of the shadow of a Samba share, the being drive V: as defined by NetDrive
- I am thinking that V: shadow is NOT a child of boot drive G:, therefore, attempting to show it, or any of it's CHILD folders, within a boot drive tree that belongs to G:, should succeeed, no?
Anyways, I think I understant the PARENT<=>CHILD folder/object limitations, however I'm not at all clear as to why the DRIVE level stuff would not behave independently of each other?
Perhaps these drive objects, since they all belong to the Drives folder at the PARENT level, are impacted by each other the same way that a drive and it's CHILD folder objects are?