How to populate table with specific values instead of pseudo-random? - eclipse

i'm trying to modify the vaadin addressbook app to a little different one with just the field names changed. but i do not know how to populate it with specific value instead of the pseudo-random as done in the vaadin tutorial example.
here is my code.
private static IndexedContainer createDummyDatasource() {
IndexedContainer ic = new IndexedContainer();
for (String p : fieldNames) {
ic.addContainerProperty(p, String.class, "");
}
String[] cnumber = { "1", "2", "3" };
String[] ctitle = { "a", "b", "c" };
String[] faculty = { "xxx" };
for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
Object id = ic.addItem();
ic.getContainerProperty(id, CNUMBER).setValue(cnumber[(int) (cnumber.length * Math.random())]);
ic.getContainerProperty(id, CTITLE).setValue(ctitle[(int) (ctitle.length * Math.random())]);
ic.getContainerProperty(id, FACULTY).setValue(faculty[(int) (faculty.length * Math.random())]);
}
return ic;
}
please help..!!

You use the setValue to set the values shown in table. And also make sure the corresponding container property is set before populating them.
If you just want to know how to bind the address book demo to an MySQL database using SQLContainer, then you can have a look at https://vaadin.com/tutorial/sql which pretty much continues where the in-memory container left you.
Of course if you have some other binding to your data JPA, in-memory beans etc, you might want to have a look at the appropriate one for your needs.

Related

Concatenate multiple PDF/A with different conformance levels

Is it possible to concatenate a number of pdf/a (with possibly different conformance levels: some pdf/a-1b, some pdf/a-3b ecc) into a single pdfa ?
I was thinking that using the latest level (3-a or 3b) would be ok but I get errors when validating with VeraPDF:
Here is my code (where :
public static byte[] CreateConformantCopy(List<byte[]> sourcePdfs)
{
var version = PdfVersion.PDF_1_7;
var type = PdfAType.PDF_A_3B;
WriterProperties wp = new WriterProperties();
wp.UseSmartMode();
wp.SetPdfVersion(version.ToPdfVersion());
PdfOutputIntent oi = new PdfOutputIntent("Custom", "", "http://www.color.org", "sRGB IEC61966-2.1", Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly().GetManifestResourceStream("xxx.Resources.sRGB_CS_profile.icm"));
using (var mergedPdf = new MemoryStream())
{
var writer = new PdfWriter(mergedPdf, wp);
using (PdfADocument newDoc = new PdfADocument(writer, type.ToPdfAConformanceLevel(), oi, new DocumentProperties() { }))
{
Document document = new Document(newDoc, PageSize.A4.Rotate());
newDoc.SetTagged();
newDoc.GetCatalog().SetLang(new PdfString(Thread.CurrentThread.CurrentUICulture.Name));
newDoc.GetCatalog().SetViewerPreferences(
new PdfViewerPreferences()
.SetDisplayDocTitle(true)
.SetCenterWindow(true)
);
PdfMerger merger = new PdfMerger(newDoc);
for (int k = 0; k < sourcePdfs.Count; k++)
{
using (var inDoc = PdfHelper.GetDocument(sourcePdfs[k]))
{
var numberOfPages = inDoc.GetNumberOfPages();
merger.Merge(inDoc, 1, numberOfPages);
}
}
newDoc.Close();
}
return mergedPdf.ToArray();
}
}
PDF/A-1 and PDF/A-2 have several differences in the requirements. So, merging them together might not be possible. Looking on your validation errors, I think this is exactly the case. For example, the very first one is about XMP metadata. The PDF/A-2 is more strict here, and you get this error because your first file (which is probably a valid PDF/A-1) does not actually satisfy the PDF/A-2 rules.
What is possible however is to attach a PDF/A-1 document to PDF/A-2 one. This does not even require the use of PDF/A-3, which allows arbitrary attachments. The PDF/A-2 standard does allow attaching valid PDF/A-1 (as well as PDF/A-2 documents).

How to add rows to TableView without having any data model

I'm fairly new to javafx, so please bear with me if my question is unclear. I've a TableView which need to be populated using an ObservableList.
The code below populates my "data" with the arraylists generated out of the Map, which in turn is used to add rows to my table.
TableView<ArrayList> table = new TableView<>();
ObservableList<ArrayList> data = FXCollections.observableArrayList();
for(int i=0;i<listSelectedVerticesIds.size();i++){
ArrayList<String> tempString = new ArrayList<>();
for(Map.Entry<String,String> temp2 : mapVertex.get(listSelectedVerticesIds.get(i)).entrySet()){
tempString.add(temp2.getValue());
}
data.add(tempString);
}
table.setItems(data);
However, I do not see the table populated with the list in "data". I'm guessing this is because there is no data binding (using setCellValueFactory). However, as you can see I dont have a data model class. All of my data comes from the Map as strings which I would like to populate in my tableview.
Please suggest.
Here is a simple way to do it that works great. You don't need a data structure to populate a table. You only see that because that's what most examples show. It is an extremely common use case to populate a table from a database or a file. I don't understand why this is so hard to find examples for. Well, hope this helps.
private TableView<ObservableList<StringProperty>> table = new TableView<>();
private ArrayList<String> myList = new ArrayList<>();
private void updateTableRow() {
for (int row = 0; row < numberOfRows; row++) {
ObservableList<StringProperty> data = FXCollections.observableArrayList();
for (int column = 0; column < numberOfColumns; column++) {
data.add(column, new SimpleStringProperty(myList.get(row + (column * numberOfRows))));
}
table.getItems().add(data);
}
}

Entity Framework 6: is it possible to update specific object property without getting the whole object?

I have an object with several really large string properties. In addition, it has a simple timestamp property.
What I trying to achieve is to update only timestamp property without getting the whole huge object to the server.
Eventually, I would like to use EF and to do in the most performant way something equivalent to this:
update [...]
set [...] = [...]
where [...]
Using the following, you can update a single column:
var yourEntity = new YourEntity() { Id = id, DateProp = dateTime };
using (var db = new MyEfContextName())
{
db.YourEntities.Attach(yourEntity);
db.Entry(yourEntity).Property(x => x.DateProp).IsModified = true;
db.SaveChanges();
}
OK, I managed to handle this. The solution is the same as proposed by Seany84, with the only addition of disabling validation, in order to overcome issue with required fields. Basically, I had to add the following line just before 'SaveChanges():
db.Configuration.ValidateOnSaveEnabled = false;
So, the complete solution is:
var yourEntity = new YourEntity() { Id = id, DateProp = dateTime };
using (var db = new MyEfContextName())
{
db.YourEntities.Attach(yourEntity);
db.Entry(yourEntity).Property(x => x.DateProp).IsModified = true;
db.Configuration.ValidateOnSaveEnabled = false;
db.SaveChanges();
}

Build dynamic LINQ queries from a string - Use Reflection?

I have some word templates(maybe thousands). Each template has merge fields which will be filled from database. I don`t like writing separate code for every template and then build the application and deploy it whenever a template is changed or a field on the template is added!
Instead, I'm trying to define all merge fields in a separate xml file and for each field I want to write the "query" which will be called when needed. EX:
mergefield1 will call query "Case.Parties.FirstOrDefault.NameEn"
mergefield2 will call query "Case.CaseNumber"
mergefield3 will call query "Case.Documents.FirstOrDefault.DocumentContent.DocumentType"
Etc,
So, for a particular template I scan its merge fields, and for each merge field I take it`s "query definition" and make that request to database using EntityFramework and LINQ. Ex. it works for these queries: "TimeSlots.FirstOrDefault.StartDateTime" or
"Case.CaseNumber"
This will be an engine which will generate word documents and fill it with merge fields from xml. In addition, it will work for any new template or new merge field.
Now, I have worked a version using reflection.
public string GetColumnValueByObjectByName(Expression<Func<TEntity, bool>> filter = null, string objectName = "", string dllName = "", string objectID = "", string propertyName = "")
{
string objectDllName = objectName + ", " + dllName;
Type type = Type.GetType(objectDllName);
Guid oID = new Guid(objectID);
dynamic Entity = context.Set(type).Find(oID); // get Object by Type and ObjectID
string value = ""; //the value which will be filled with data from database
IEnumerable<string> linqMethods = typeof(System.Linq.Enumerable).GetMethods(BindingFlags.Static | BindingFlags.Public).Select(s => s.Name).ToList(); //get all linq methods and save them as list of strings
if (propertyName.Contains('.'))
{
string[] properies = propertyName.Split('.');
dynamic object1 = Entity;
IEnumerable<dynamic> Child = new List<dynamic>();
for (int i = 0; i < properies.Length; i++)
{
if (i < properies.Length - 1 && linqMethods.Contains(properies[i + 1]))
{
Child = type.GetProperty(properies[i]).GetValue(object1, null);
}
else if (linqMethods.Contains(properies[i]))
{
object1 = Child.Cast<object>().FirstOrDefault(); //for now works only with FirstOrDefault - Later it will be changed to work with ToList or other linq methods
type = object1.GetType();
}
else
{
if (linqMethods.Contains(properies[i]))
{
object1 = type.GetProperty(properies[i + 1]).GetValue(object1, null);
}
else
{
object1 = type.GetProperty(properies[i]).GetValue(object1, null);
}
type = object1.GetType();
}
}
value = object1.ToString(); //.StartDateTime.ToString();
}
return value;
}
I`m not sure if this is the best approach. Does anyone have a better suggestion, or maybe someone has already done something like this?
To shorten it: The idea is to make generic linq queries to database from a string like: "Case.Parties.FirstOrDefault.NameEn".
Your approach is very good. I have no doubt that it already works.
Another approach is using Expression Tree like #Egorikas have suggested.
Disclaimer: I'm the owner of the project Eval-Expression.NET
In short, this library allows you to evaluate almost any C# code at runtime (What you exactly want to do).
I would suggest you use my library instead. To keep the code:
More readable
Easier to support
Add some flexibility
Example
public string GetColumnValueByObjectByName(Expression<Func<TEntity, bool>> filter = null, string objectName = "", string dllName = "", string objectID = "", string propertyName = "")
{
string objectDllName = objectName + ", " + dllName;
Type type = Type.GetType(objectDllName);
Guid oID = new Guid(objectID);
object Entity = context.Set(type).Find(oID); // get Object by Type and ObjectID
var value = Eval.Execute("x." + propertyName, new { x = entity });
return value.ToString();
}
The library also allow you to use dynamic string with IQueryable
Wiki: LINQ-Dynamic

Testing With A Fake DbContext and Autofixture and Moq

SO follow this example
example and how make a fake DBContex For test my test using just this work fine
[Test]
public void CiudadIndex()
{
var ciudades = new FakeDbSet<Ciudad>
{
new Ciudad {CiudadId = 1, EmpresaId =1, Descripcion ="Santa Cruz", FechaProceso = DateTime.Now, MarcaBaja = null, UsuarioId = 1},
new Ciudad {CiudadId = 2, EmpresaId =1, Descripcion ="La Paz", FechaProceso = DateTime.Now, MarcaBaja = null, UsuarioId = 1},
new Ciudad {CiudadId = 3, EmpresaId =1, Descripcion ="Cochabamba", FechaProceso = DateTime.Now, MarcaBaja = null, UsuarioId = 1}
};
//// Create mock unit of work
var mockData = new Mock<IContext>();
mockData.Setup(m => m.Ciudades).Returns(ciudades);
// Setup controller
var homeController = new CiudadController(mockData.Object);
// Invoke
var viewResult = homeController.Index();
var ciudades_de_la_vista = (IEnumerable<Ciudad>)viewResult.Model;
// Assert..
}
Iam tryign now to use Autofixture-Moq
to create "ciudades" but I cant. I try this
var fixture = new Fixture();
var ciudades = fixture.Build<FakeDbSet<Ciudad>>().CreateMany<FakeDbSet<Ciudad>>();
var mockData = new Mock<IContext>();
mockData.Setup(m => m.Ciudades).Returns(ciudades);
I get this error
Cant convert System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable(FakeDbSet(Ciudad)) to System.Data.Entity.IDbSet(Ciudad)
cant put "<>" so I replace with "()" in the error message
Implementation of IContext and FakeDbSet
public interface IContext
{
IDbSet<Ciudad> Ciudades { get; }
}
public class FakeDbSet<T> : IDbSet<T> where T : class
how can make this to work?
A minor point... In stuff like:
var ciudades_fixture = fixture.Build<Ciudad>().CreateMany<Ciudad>();
The second type arg is unnecessary and should be:
var ciudades_fixture = fixture.Build<Ciudad>().CreateMany();
I really understand why you need a FakeDbSet and the article is a bit TL;DR... In general, I try to avoid faking and mucking with ORM bits and instead dealing with interfaces returning POCOs to the max degree possible.
That aside... The reason the normal syntax for initialising the list works is that there is an Add (and IEnumerable) in DBFixture. AutoFixture doesn't have a story for that pattern directly (after all it is compiler syntactic sugar and not particularly amenable to reflection or in line with any other conventions) but you can use AddManyTo as long as there is an ICollection in play. Luckily, within the impl of FakeDbSet as in the article, the following gives us an in:-
public ObservableCollection<T> Local
{
get { return _data; }
}
As ObservableCollection<T> derives from ICollection<T>, you should be able to:
var ciudades = new FakeDbSet<Cuidad>();
fixture.AddManyTo(ciudades.Local);
var mockData = new Mock<IContext>();
mockData.Setup(m => m.Ciudades).Returns(ciudades);
It's possible to wire up a customization to make this prettier, but at least you have a way to manage it. The other option is to have something implement ICollection (or add a prop with a setter taking IEnumerable<T> and have AF generate the parent object, causing said collection to be filled in.
Long superseded side note: In your initial question, you effectively have:
fixture.Build<FakeDbSet<Ciudad>>().CreateMany()
The problem becomes clearer then - you are asking AF to generate Many FakeDbSet<Ciudad>s, which is not what you want.
I haven't used AutoFixture in a while, but shouldn't it be:
var ciudades = new FakeDbSet<Ciudad>();
fixture.AddManyTo(ciudades);
for the moment I end doing this, I will keep reading about how use automoq, cause I'm new in this
var fixture = new Fixture();
var ciudades_fixture = fixture.Build<Ciudad>().CreateMany<Ciudad>();
var ciudades = new FakeDbSet<Ciudad>();
foreach (var item in ciudades_fixture)
{
ciudades.Add(item);
}
var mockData = new Mock<IContext>();
fixture.Create<Mock<IContext>>();
mockData.Setup(r => r.Ciudades).Returns(ciudades);