I am having problems creating new dynamic blocks in different arrangements, that is, initially I create an arrangement1 with cardviews soon making the arrangement1 invisible. Then arrangement2 is visible and I call to create new cardviews in arrangement2. I would like to know why there are no new cardviews in arrangement2?
I tested it in two ways, only with a dynamic block for two arrangements and also with a dynamic block for each arrangement and and two ways don’t work. Would anyone have a solution to this problem without having to be deleting and constantly creating cardviews in the same arrangement?
I remind you that all the cardviews created are configured to be visible and the IDs are all different in each arrangement. @yusufcihan
In this case, “module of” works perfectly for ManufacturesArrangement but when I call the MicrocontrollersArrangement block there is no cardwiew. In the MicrocontrollersArrangement there is nothing about “module of”.
To help understand the logic of the blocks, I highlighted with red frames in the image below.
Consider that the application has all due calls because it did not present any error. What I want is to validate with another solution, if possible, the following logic:
First, I create cardviews contained in the arrangement1 and they are all visible and with different IDs. In arrangement2 it is invisible without any cardview.
Then I make the arrangement1 invisible.
This time, I create other cardviews in arrangement2 with different IDs as well. However, none of the newly created new cardviews appear.
If I switch to arrangement1 they do appear.
So I tried to use instead of a block of the dynamic components extension for each arrangement but it also presented the same result as before.
I believe that when components IDs (in this case are cardviews) are instantiated to an arrangement once, I can only instantiate other components IDs in another arrangement if the old ones are deleted. Does that make sense? Could you please try to replicate the logic described above in a small test sample to validate this situation, please?
