@ScarletKuro do you think this is the right approach? Also I'm not sure about the parameter name Hidden, any better ideas?

If you think this is OK I can add tests and docs tomorrow.

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 91.43%. Comparing base (43fbb95) to head (ca14c64).
Report is 8 commits behind head on dev.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              dev   #10349      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.48%   91.43%   -0.06%     
==========================================
  Files         415      417       +2     
  Lines       13053    13222     +169     
  Branches     2473     2538      +65     
==========================================
+ Hits        11942    12089     +147     
- Misses        548      554       +6     
- Partials      563      579      +16     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Had to get caught up, question- Shouldn't that button always be hidden or visibility collapse or something when not in a popover? I think could probably solve it all with just a css class when laid out in that manner under a popover to not show it and disable it but the popover version would work fine

@versile2 @henon @danielchalmers
What do you guys think? I think this solution is good for edge cases. Ideally, it would be great if the DataGrid natively supported context menus on rows and allowed customization. Then MudMenu near the DataGrid with PositionAtCursor="true" wouldn't be necessary. However, since there isn't such support, I think the proposed solution is the only workaround.

I guess @danielchalmers has a point. Should we decide to keep the parameter though I'd like it to be named ShowButton instead.

Might be a stupid question but why can't we add the mud-menu-hidden class if the activator content is null? Why do we need a second property?

When the activator content is null a default button is shown. That's the main use of MudMenu.

Might be a stupid question but why can't we add the mud-menu-hidden class if the activator content is null? Why do we need a second property?

When the activator content is null a default button is shown. That's the main use of MudMenu.

Right, no activator content or label = hidden?

<MudMenu>
    <MudMenuItem>Enlist</MudMenuItem>
    <MudMenuItem>Barracks</MudMenuItem>
    <MudMenuItem>Armory</MudMenuItem>
</MudMenu>

Do people use the empty button that's shown in your Before example?

Right, no activator content or label = hidden?

I like this idea.

Do people use the empty button that's shown in your Before example?

I hope not. I think this behavior qualifies as unintended / buggy.

Right, no activator content or label = hidden?

I like this idea.

We can do this but we should explicitly document it with an example in the docs.

Thanks @meenzen