when i select index 0 then all Previously selected item should be remove. Is this possible? i have multiple chosen drop down in same page...i have tried so many things but didn't get the proper solutions yet.
I am not sure what you mean. If it is multiple select, it means you can select "multiple" items, otherwise it's a normal select. Also see this and check out if it provides something helpful for you.
Related
I have one single master Subject table which have several part tables. One convenient thing about Table.delete() is that is displays a prompt with all existing entries that were created under that Subject. Aside from delete() is there an alternative way to print what part table entries were created under a single Subject entry?
Thank you
To get the entry count of all the part tables restricted by some restriction (e.g. subject_name), you can do something like this:
restriction = {'subject_name': 'my_star_subject'}
for part_table in Subject.parts(as_objects=True):
part_table_query = part_table & restriction
print(f'{part_table.table_name}: len(part_table_query)')
It's a slow process, but I think I would do the following to see where entries were:
(subject.Subject & 'subject="<NAME>"').descendants(as_objects=True)
Not sure if you'd be better off with children (1 level down) or descendants (all the way down). delete gives the full set of descendants, using table.delete_quick(get_count=True).
EDIT:
To just get the counts, you might want:
[print(i.table_name,len(i)) for i in (subject.Subject & 'subject="<NAME>"').descendants(as_objects=True)]
I have a table called transactions. Within that is a field called ipn_type. I would like to create separate table occurrences for the different ipn types I may have.
For example, one value for ipn_type is "dispute". In the past I would create a global field called "rel_dispute" and I would populate that with the value of "dispute". Then I could create a new table occurrence of the transactions table, and make a relationship based on transactions::ipn_type = transactions::rel_dispute. This way only the dispute records would show up in my new table occurrence.
Not long ago, somebody pointed out to me that this is no longer necessary, and there is a simpler way to setup such a relationship to create a new table occurrence. I can't for the life of me remember how that was done, though.
Any information on this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
To show a found set of only one type, you must either perform a find or use the Go to Related Record script step to show only related records. What you describe as your previous setup fits the latter.
The simpler way is to perform a find - either on demand, or by a script triggered OnLayoutEnter.
The new 'easy' way is probably:
using one base relationship only and
filtering only the displaying portal by type. This can be done with a global field, a global variable containing current display type. Multiple portals with different filter conditions are possible as well.
~jens
I'm operating in Word 2013 and 2010, so I can use code that works in either. I'm trying to create a word document to keep track of my recipes. At its most basic I want to have a TOC that updates based on headings. I also want it to have any category I want (eg: Appetizers, Drinks, Entrée, etc...) ordered alphabetically. Under each category I have tables. Each recipe gets a table that has it's name, directions, notes, tags, and potentially a picture. The second cell has another two column table inside of it that contains the quantity and name of each ingredient necessary for the recipe.
I have all of that so far and I'd like to automate adding new categories and recipes. Currently, I have to find the category, then scroll down to find where the name goes alphabetically and insert a quick table I made. I then fill in the info.
I'd like to be able to search the document for each category name, then insert the new category wherever it belongs, with a space before and after it. I found that my tables give me trouble if I don't have a space between everything. It tries to pull anything it's touching into the table and merge them.
I wanted to give the backstory, so you'd know where I was going to go eventually and could provide help that fits better with what I need. After I can add a new category, I plan to use vba to organize each table alphabetically by the name in the first cell of each table. It will also help when I start adding sorts to it. Eventually, I'd like to be able to sort it to say, only display recipes from a certain person, or display my frequently used recipes. I'd then have it either hide all the others or create a new doc with just these. So thanks for the help. Below I'll post the code I most recently tried. I tried a few other variations of this same code and keep getting an 'expected end of statement. I've gotten other errors when trying other variations of it, but this is the best I can come up with on my own.
Private Sub UserForm_Initialize()
For Each cat In ActiveDocument.Styles = "Heading 1"
lstCat.AddItem (cat)
Next
End Sub
I have a form called frmAddCategory I'm using as a test. I was going to have a listbox lstCat to show every category with the style heading 1. I have a textbox called txtAdd to type new ones and a cmdAdd button to add it to the form.
Edit: I've been playing around with my macro recorder after finding out about outline view mode. I set it to show only 'heading 1' level and selected the ones I wanted, not selecting the appendix or reference. Then I went to the home tab and sorted paragraph by ascending alphabetical order. I got some code I believe I can use to get it to run in VBA. However, it's not a complete fix as I don't want to select the last two with heading 1. It also works if I manually select the tables under each heading 1, but I can't set the spacing before and after. I'd like each heading and the tables under them to have a space or two between each for looks and editing purposes.
Also, if someone is going to give my question a negative rating, then please post a comment explaining. As far as I can tell from the faq about the forum and the other questions I've seen, it is a well posed question. A clear title, a good explanation of the problem, code examples, research. So if I am doing something wrong, please inform me, so that I can correct it.
first thanks for your bit about macro recorder and outline mode, I have been trying for long time to fill a list box with selection.text between two HeadingLevel(1) headings.
now to yours, sorry I can't think of way to do in word. BUT it would be real easy in Access. one table of categories like called tblCategories another for recipes tblRecipes. To make real easy, when the use autoID on ALL tables. But to avoid LOTS of headaches for tblRecipes rename its autoID to RecipesID same for other tables. in table of recipes you can use a memo field to hold large amount of data. the spot for text in Heading would be put in one field of the tblRecipes. once you have tables looking to have a field for each item you want to track. hit save, then use wizard to create a form based on table. repeat for all tables you want to have it real easy to put info into any table.
1.reportTOC based on query of Every Heading you want, can preview or print as want. reportByCategory and so on reports are sorted a to z unless you want to sort by Owner, then recipe all auto sorted a - z.
report wizard to get hard copy. if you want to sort real easy, built in. also if want to be able to pick all recipes for a holiday real easy, one table tblHolidays. one tblHolidayRecipes fields autoId (not used by you anywhere but needed), fldRecipesId (holds RecipesId) , fldHolidayId (holds HolidayId). the wizard will show how to get only what you want. in access 2013 you can include pix of food or.
What I really need is a Tabular form that allows me to update multiple rows at a time while being filterable like an Interactive report. Any chance this is even remotely possible?
I would also like to hijack the row checkboxes on a tabular form that appear when the 'delete' functionality is activated and use them to select which rows get assigned a to a group based on a common attribute. (i.e. My table contains parts in my inventory and I need to be able to assign parts with common attributes to a group for processing)
Perhaps a group-by function that creates a new row in a 'Group' table with the group as the PK and the parts assigned to that group as a list or something...?
Thoughts? I am kind of at a loss...
It's really not that hard :) You can easily transform an IR into a pseudo-tabular form. And even though there are always more stylish and elegant solutions, those usually involve lots of javascript and/or plugins. They're nice, but not always what you want or need of course.
So how to manipulate your output? Use the APEX_ITEM api!
Quick example. I have an ir built on emp. I added a checkbox and textbox.
select empno, ename, deptno,
apex_item.checkbox(1, empno) empno_selected,
apex_item.text(2, ename, 10, 10) ename_edit
from emp
Don't forget: in the column attributes, set Display text as to Standard Report Column. If you don't, the output will be in plain text. Since apex_item generates html code, you don't want the plain text of course :)
Now, to be able to perform DML based on the actions you do in those generated fields, you will need a process. Let me start off by pointing out though that the generated items are stored in application variables, namely in arrays in APEX_APPLICATION.
Take note of the behaviour of checkboxes: only ticked boxes will have their value stored in the array!
As an example, i've made this small On Submit process (also adding a SUBMIT button on the form to actually perform the submit...)
for i in 1..apex_application.g_f01.count
loop
insert into empselected(empno, selectiondate, ename_changed)
values(apex_application.g_f01(i), sysdate, apex_application.g_f02(i));
end loop;
This will loop over the records with the checkboxes ticked, and insert them into some table. For example, i ticked the box with KING and edited the textfield. See record nr 2 (1 is from a previous action ;))
It's not all the way there yet though. You still miss out on the functionality of a tabular form and it's processes, and things like optimistic locking. If you want to stay with tabular forms, you can also, for example, check out this link. There have also been some questions here about writing your own mru processes etc, like this one ;)
It is possisble, using the same tabular form.
Create an item (text item) in the tabular form region.
Create a submit button (Create a button displayed among this region's items)
Modify the where clause in the tabular form region source
For Example, you need search by customer name:
WHERE lower(CUSTOMER_NAME) LIKE '%'||lower(nvl(:PXX_SEARCH,CUSOTOMER_NAME))||'%'
If you need to search for other field only add other condition to the where clause
WHERE (
lower(CUSTOMER_NAME) LIKE '%'||lower(nvl(:PXX_SEARCH,CUSOTOMER_NAME))||'%'
or lower(CUSTOMER_address) LIKE '%'||lower(nvl(:PXX_SEARCH,CUSOTOMER_NAME))||'%'
)
Simple and use the same tabular form.
I have a FileMaker script which calculates a value. I have 1 record from table A from which a relation points to n records of table B. What is the best way to set B::Field to this value for each of these n related records?
Doing Set Field [B::Field; $Value] will only set the value of the first of the n related records. What works however is the following:
Go to Related Record [Show only related records; From table: "B"; Using layout: "B_layout" (B)]
Loop
Set Field [B::Field; $Value]
Go To Record/Request/Page [Next; Exit after last]
End Loop
Go to Layout [original layout]
Is there a better way to accomplish this? I dislike the fact that in order to set some value (model) programmatically (controller), I have to create a layout (view) and switch to it, even though the user is not supposed to notice anything like a changing view.
FileMaker always was primarily an end-user tool, so all its scripts are more like macros that repeat user actions. It nowhere near as flexible as programmer-oriented environments. To go to another layout is, actually, a standard method to manipulate related values. You would have to do this anyway if you, say, want to duplicate a related record or print a report.
So:
Your script is quite good, except that you can use the Replace Field Contents script step. Also add Freeze Window script step in the beginning; it will prevent the screen from updating.
If you have a portal to the related table, you may loop over portal rows.
FileMaker plug-in API can execute SQL and there are some plug-ins that expose this functionality. So if you really want, this is also an option.
I myself would prefer the first variant.
Loop through a Portal of Related Records
Looping through a portal that has the related records and setting the field has a couple of advantages over either Replace or Go To Record, Set Field Loop.
You don't have to leave the layout. The portal can be hidden or place off screen if it isn't already on the layout.
You can do it transactionally. IE you can make sure that either all the records get edited or none of them do. This is important since in a multi-user networked solution, records may not always be editable. Neither replace or looping through the records without a portal is transaction safe.
Here is some info on FileMaker transactions.
You can loop through a portal using Go To Portal Row. Like so:
Go To Portal Row [First]
Loop
Set Field [B::Field; $Value]
Go To Portal Row [Next; Exit after last]
End Loop
It depends on what you're using the value for. If you need to hard wire a certain field, then it doesn't sound like you've got a very normalised data structure. The simplest way would be a calculation in TableB instead of a stored field, or if this is something that is stored, could it be a lookup field instead that is set on record creation?
What is the field in TableB being used for and how?