I am implementing a GWT CellTable with paging and sorting by multiple columns dynamically.
The basics can be found in the CellTable Developer's Guide.
However, the dynamic example does not tell how to find out by which column the user wants to sort (it simply sorts by the 'name' column). That's not enough in my case, as I want to allow the user to sort by different columns.
The only solution I could think of, which is not very elegant, is to keep track of which column is sorted in ascending order or not (using table.getColumnSortList(indexOfColumn).isAscending()) and then figuring out which one has been clicked by comparing the values for each column (the one that changed is probably what the user clicked).
This involves keeping information in my classes that should be available somewhere in the CellTable! But I can't find that information!
Thanks for any help.
I found the answer. As explained in the javadocs for com.google.gwt.user.cellview.client.ColumnSortList:
An ordered list containing the sort history of Columns in a table. The 0th item is the ColumnSortInfo of the most recently sorted column.
So, to know which column was last sorted by, you simply do:
ColumnSortInfo info = table.getColumnSortList().get(0);
Column<Type> sortByColumn = info.getColumn();
Related
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.
Is it possible, in SQL Server 2008, using the full text index syntax, to run a query such as this one?
SELECT *
FROM TABLE_TO_SEARCH S,
TABLE_WITH_STRINGS_TO_SEARCH SS
WHERE
CONTAINS(S.WHOLE_NAME,SS.FIRST_NAME)
OR CONTAINS(S.WHOLE_NAME,SS.LAST_NAME)
I need to search for the FIRST_NAME in table TABLE_TO_SEARCH, column WHOLE_NAME that has an full text index on it. It doesn't seem to be a valid query though... Is there any workaround to it by using the full text index search?
LATER EDIT:
Here is the business case: each night I am downloading from several websites information about "blacklisted" individuals and insert it into a table in this format: WholeName, LastName, FirstName, MiddleName. But the data is chaotic as WholeName does not necessarily contain either the last, first or middle name or the WholeName is null while the other 3 fields have values, or every of these 4 fields is null and so on. Also, the data may repeat itself as one blacklisted individual may come from 2+ of these websites. What I need to do is to compare this data, as chaotic as it is, against our customer data based on our customer's First and Last name and give it a matching score (rank) against the files we download from these websites.
First I tried with charindex or like operators but I couldn't create a scoring algorithm based on this and also it took 6 hours to compare just our customer's first and last name with only the WholeName column from the TABLE_TO_SEARCH table. I thought that perhaps implementing the full_text index it would get easier and faster but ... apparently I was wrong.
Has anyone dealt with a task like this? And if so, what was the best approach?
After skimming http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms187787.aspx and http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms142571.aspx I don't think it is possible to do your search in this way. Not only that, but it seems this type of index wouldn't work well with names anyway.
If you care about checking one name then all you have to do is set those values to variables. This method would allow you to use the full-text index.
Otherwise, I would suggest splitting the WHOLE_NAME column (if there is a space or unique character between the first and last name) and comparing each part to those other columns. If you are working with a huge data set, you may want to experiment with doing this at a temp table level and creating an index.
Good luck!
I have a drop down list of subjects. Two particular subjects are Mathematics and Additional Mathematics. When I choose Mathematics from the drop down list, records from Additional Mathematics and Mathematics are both displayed. Worse is that records from Additional Mathematics are shown first. Many colleagues made mistakes because of this.
How do I make the drop down list such that when clicked, the exact terms are used instead?
This is a problem that is not necessarily unique to FileMaker. You are searching for a name that is imprecise because it is a match for multiple names. Rather instead you might want to search for a unique key whose subject name is 'Mathematics' as displayed in your drop down. It is the use of that unique key that allows you to perform a precise search, even when the name of one subject is a partial or complete match for another.
This solution requires you to add a unique serial number which is, in your case, to alter the Subjects table and add a field called 'idnumber' or similar. The field type should be Number, and the options should include Auto-Enter-Serial number-Generate and On creation-increment by 1. The trick here lies in making sure no two subjects have the same 'idnumber' even when you aren't paying attention, so set the next value to something greater than the number of subjects that already exist. Then from another layout assign each existing subject a unique idnumber, noting that if there are a great many subjects you could script that step.
I should mention that many recommend a best practice of never changing a production layout, but rather to duplicate the layout and make the required changes to the duplicate. This minimizes the effects of testing your changes etc.
Finally, change your layout in inspector such that the drop down list shows Use values from field: 'idnumber'. Select Also display values from second field: 'Subject' and Show values only from second field. Now your drop down is the same clean selection as before. The field will not look correct yet because it will show a number. To make it look correct you can insert another field, selecting 'Subject'. Place that field over top of the 'idnumber' and send 'idnumber' to the back. Fill the 'Subject' field with the correct background solid color instead of none, and enjoy your new precision search capability! The entire process is handled server side so it should not matter that client access is IWP.
If you're using the selection to do a find, put an "==" before the text you're searching on. This will tell FileMaker to do an exact field contents search, instead of a "contains" search.
I am relatively new to Filemaker programming, but I have come across what I thought was a bug, which I have been tearing my hair out trying to squash, only to find it is more a "feature" than a bug. I have a field set as the key for lookups in a ms sql database which I have created a relationship with. I have it set as a drop down, and it is showing 2 fields (last name and first name). Unfortunately, it only shows 1 person per last name in the sorted list (example, there are 5 people with the last name "Bennett" but only 1 shows). After driving myself nuts trying to find the error, I found the following in the filemaker troubleshooting section:
"
If the value list is defined to display information from two fields, items will not be duplicated for the field on which the value list is sorted. For example, if the value list displays information from the Company field and the Name field, and if the values are sorted by the Company field, only one person from each company will appear in the value list."
As I read it, I can't do what I need to do with a value list (display EVERY last name from the sql file) so what other options do I have? I have experimented with creating a portal which DOES show a list of ALL the last names and first names, but I don't know/understand enough to know what logic/functionality I need so if I click one of the people in the portal list it will do the same thing as if I clicked it in a dropdown value list, which is to then do the lookups and populate the rest of the fields in this database from the information in the record in the sql database. Any and all help would be greatly appreciated, and I appreciate any help any of you can offer. Thank you!
There might be some things that cause this;
You cannot create a link based on a calculation that needs to be calculated each time (Filemaker does not know what to do with this, logical in a way)
Based on what you do I would personally link the two tables based on an lets say company ID instead of a name, as a one to many join. This will definitely eliminate the 'feature' filemaker has of showing unique names only in the joined table. On database level I would join on ID, on Value list I would select the ID as first field and the (calculated) name as second field, than showing only the second field (option in the value list definition popup) for your selection list.
Hope this helps.