"ITableLabelProvider " interface has given two methods to implement out label provider,
one of the methods is
public String getColumnText(Object element, int columnIndex);
in this method element represents one entire row, based on the column index we will get data and set to table.
My requirement is , I want a method such that element represents one column,
so based on column index I can access data.
At the moment there is no label provider, which would provide element, representing just a column (even cell). It is actually quite logical, if you think about it. So, you should rely on column index to fetch the data (for example, having a switch by column index).
Another possibility would be to do it like this:
TableViewerColumn tableViewerColumn = new TableViewerColumn(tableViewer, SWT.LEFT);
tableViewerColumn.getColumn().setText("Column");
tableViewerColumn.setLabelProvider(new ColumnLabelProvider() {
#Override
public String getText(Object element) {
return ((RowRepresentingObject) element).getColumnValue();
}
});
Related
I have a smartsheet integration where I'm obtaining data from another program via a web service and writing into a sheet. The relevant code to populate the sheet is here:
Cell[] cellsA = new Cell[]
{
new Cell.AddCellBuilder(sheet.Columns[0].Id, projectData[i][0].Trim()).Build() //Project ID
,new Cell.AddCellBuilder(sheet.Columns[1].Id, projectData[i][1].Trim()).Build() //Customer
,new Cell.AddCellBuilder(sheet.Columns[2].Id, projectData[i][2].Trim()).Build() //Description
,new Cell.AddCellBuilder(sheet.Columns[3].Id, projectData[i][3].Trim()).Build() //Status
,new Cell.AddCellBuilder(sheet.Columns[4].Id, startDate).SetStrict(false).Build() //StartDate
,new Cell.AddCellBuilder(sheet.Columns[5].Id, endDate).SetStrict(false).Build() //EndDate
,new Cell.AddCellBuilder(sheet.Columns[6].Id, projectData[i][6].Trim()).Build() //Project Manager
};
// Specify contents of first row.
Row rowA = new Row.AddRowBuilder(null, true, null, null, null).SetCells(cellsA).Build();
My question is, instead of using
sheet.Columns[0].Id
Is it possible to use a column name to identify a specific column instead of the index? The reason being if a user moves or rearranges columns, this will result in errors (date formats, etc.).
Thanks...
You cannot programmatically reference a column by name (even if you could, you probably wouldn’t want to — because name is subject to change, just like position is), but you can programmatically reference a column by ID (which will never change, even if the column is moved or renamed).
How insert item on top table in PostgreSQL? That it is possible? In the table I have only two fields as text. First is primary key.
CREATE TABLE news_table (
title text not null primary key,
url text not null
);
I need a simple query for the program in java.
OK, this is my code:
get("/getnews", (request, response) -> {
List<News> getNews = newsService.getNews();
List<News> getAllNews = newsService.getAllNews();
try (Connection connection = DB.sql2o.open()) {
String sql = "INSERT INTO news_table(title, url) VALUES (:title, :url)";
for (News news : getNews) {
if (!getAllNews.contains(news)) {
connection.createQuery(sql, true)
.addParameter("title", news.getTitle())
.addParameter("url", news.getUrl())
.executeUpdate()
.getKey();
}
}
}
return newsService.getNews();
}, json());
The problem is that as it calls getnews method for the second time this new news adds at the end of the table, and there is no extant hronologi news. How this resolve? I use Sql2o + sparkjava.
Probably already I know. I need to reverse the List getnews before I will must contains object getnews and getallnews?
There is no start or end in a table. If you want to sort your data, just use an ORDER BY in your SELECT statements. Without ORDER BY, there is no order.
Relational theory, the mathematical foundation of relational databases, lays down certain conditions that relations (represented in real databases as tables) must obey. One of them is that they have no ordering (i.e., the rows will neither be stored nor retrieved in any particular order, since they are treated as a mathematical set). It's therefore completely under the control of the RDBMS where a new row is entered into a table.
Hence there is no way to ensure a particular ordering of the data without using an ORDER BY clause when you retrieve the data.
I'm new to Couchbase and am struggling to get a composite index to do what I want it to. The use-case is this:
I have a set of "Enumerations" being stored as documents
Each has a "last_updated" field which -- as you may have guessed -- stores the last time that the field was updated
I want to be able to show only those enumerations which have been updated since some given date but still sort the list by the name of the enumeration
I've created a Couchbase View like this:
function (doc, meta) {
var time_array;
if (doc.doc_type === "enum") {
if (doc.last_updated) {
time_array = doc.last_updated.split(/[- :]/);
} else {
time_array = [0,0,0,0,0,0];
}
for(var i=0; i<time_array.length; i++) { time_array[i] = parseInt(time_array[i], 10); }
time_array.unshift(meta.id);
emit(time_array, null);
}
}
I have one record that doesn't have the last_updated field set and therefore has it's time fields are all set to zero. I thought as a first test I could filter out that result and I put in the following:
startkey = ["a",2012,0,0,0,0,0]
endkey = ["Z",2014,0,0,0,0,0]
While the list is sorted by the 'id' it isn't filtering anything! Can anyone tell me what I'm doing wrong? Is there a better composite view to achieve these results?
In couchbase when you query view by startkey - endkey you're unable to filter results by 2 or more properties. Couchbase has only one index, so it will filter your results only by first param. So your query will be identical to query with:
startkey = ["a"]
endkey = ["Z"]
Here is a link to complete answer by Filipe Manana why it can't be filtered by those dates.
Here is a quote from it:
For composite keys (arrays), elements are compared from left to right and comparison finishes as soon as a element is different from the corresponding element in the other key (same as what happens when comparing strings à la memcmp() or strcmp()).
So if you want to have a view that filters by date, date array should go first in composite key.
First of I am new to ORMLite. I would like my model class to have a field which is a list of strings, that would eventually hold a list of tags for my model object.
Which ORMLite annotations should I use?
Firstly I don't want to have a table of all tags, and then use the #ForeignCollectionField.
Also I thought of using the #DatabaseField(dataType=DataType.SERIALIZABLE) annotation, but it turns out that List<String> doesn't implement the Serializable interface.
What are your suggestions?
First of all, List doesn't implement Serializable but ArrayList certainly does as well as most of the common collection implementations. But storing a huge list is probably not the best of doing this from a pure object model standpoint.
So why don't you want to have a table of all tags? That's the best way from a pure model standpoint. It will require a 2nd query if you need them every time. That's the way hibernate would store a list or array of tags.
After reading your comment #creen, I still think you do want a table of tags. Your model class would then have:
#ForeignCollectionField
Collection<Tag> tags;
The tags table would not have a single tag named "red" with multiple model classes referring to it but multiple "red" entries. It would look like:
model_id name
1 "red"
1 "blue"
2 "red"
3 "blue"
3 "black"
Whenever you are removing the model object, you would first do a tags.clear(); which would remove all of the tags associated with that model from the tags table. You would not have to do any extra cleanup or anything.
No need to go for #ForeignCollectionField for simple String Array
Change your code
#DatabaseField(dataType=DataType.SERIALIZABLE)
List<String> users;
to
#DatabaseField(dataType = DataType.SERIALIZABLE)
String[] users;
Database doesn't want to store dynamically grow able arrays. That is the reason it allows only static array like string[] and not List.
I added two properties... one that gets written to the database as a csv string and the other that translates this:
[Ignore]
public List<string> Roles
{
get
{
return new List<string>(RolesCsv.Split(new char[] { ',' }));
}
set
{
RolesCsv = string.Join(",", value);
}
}
public string RolesCsv { get; set; }
I'm trying to sort a list of entities using a GridView in ASP.NET, but I can't seem to get it working following examples. I have a property called Name on my entity, and I'm trying to sort by a specified column if given, or the Name column if the sortExpression is empty.
public static List<Product> GetProducts(int startRowIndex, int maximumRows, string sortExpression) {
using(var context = new ShopEntities()) {
var products = context.Products;
products.OrderBy("it."+(string.IsNullOrEmpty(sortExpression) ? "Name" : sortExpression))
.Skip(startRowIndex)
.Take(maximumRows);
return products.ToList();
}
}
I can't get it to sort though. The only other option seems to be doing a switch on the property name for every property in the entity and using a lambda.
OrderBy doesn't mutate the expression. It returns a new expression, which your code ignores. Change your code to:
products = products.OrderBy("it."+ //...