I'm in need of a little help in here . I'm getting results that come from virtual property , but one row displays in multiple rows in view. How to display a record inside a row , and not in multiple records
#foreach (var item in Model.Event.Id)
appears to be your problem. You're looping over the event ID, which since it's a string, will be treated like an array of characters. Therefore it prints one character from the ID on each line, and then, because of the rest of the code, repeats all the other details of that event on each line.
Since you only appear to have one single Event in your Model, it seems that you do not need any kind of loop here at all.
However it's not entirely clear what your intentions are - perhaps you intended to loop over something else in your model which is not shown. If so, please clarify the question and possibly the answer could be expanded.
Related
I am currently working on a rogue-like game in GameMaker Studio 2 and i would like to have an item spawner where no items are repeated.
I have tried multiple different ideas of what i think would work, such as giving items and id variable and only spawning items which hasn't had it's id called, although it doesn't seem to work.
The code I have right now is basic, but that is because it's the only way I've been able to spawn an item, there is repeating items with what i have and i would like to stop that from happening.
Here is the Create code of the object:
// Items
var items = choose(
obj_homing,
obj_tracking,
obj_bounce,
obj_double_xp,
obj_shotgun,
obj_orbit,
obj_firefaster,
obj_scattershot,
obj_damageboost,
obj_explosive
);
instance_create_layer(x, y, "Items", choose(items));
I haven't had any actually crashes in the game, although the errors i have faced are multiple of the same object spawning twice when i would like items to not repeat.
One option is to modify the items array after each call to remove the spawned item, and re-initialize it as full only at the start of each game or when the array is empty.
The problem I'm seeing in looking through the Game Maker Language Documentation is that I cannot find a way to delete an object from an existing array and resize the array.
You're placing choose on both defining the var, and when creating the layer.
Now, I don't know exactly what choose does, but I assume it's choosing randomly a selection from the array.
So Items would only return a single chosen item from the array, maybe it's better to remove the choose function from the Items, and only decide that when creating the object.
So the Items should become an array:
var items = [
obj_homing,
obj_tracking,
obj_bounce,
obj_double_xp,
obj_shotgun,
obj_orbit,
obj_firefaster,
obj_scattershot,
obj_damageboost,
obj_explosive
];
Just save the random instance in a variable, then when you create a random instance, check if equals to the instance that you have created previously, and if it is, call again the function until the previous instance is different from the new generated instance.
If you want to spawn every item only once, how about changing the current spawned object in the array to "noone".
And at every spawn cycle, you would check, if the selected item is noone and if so, select the next item (array[i++]).
Also do not forget to randomize the seed, somewhere in the beginning of your game with randomize().
We have a hierarchical watch app.
The root controller is a table of menu items. That list of items is controlled by a server. The data is retrieved and stored in core data. The menu is populated the first time going into the app.
But I want this table to stay current. My thought was to add code to willActivate to check if there was changes, and reload the table. In my reload logic I call the same function I called the first time, which sets the menuTable.setNumberOfRows and creates each row. Looking at what I'm putting in the logs, it is going through this logic with a different count of rows and new labels. But the app on the watch shows the table with the old data.
How can I get this table to reload with the new information?
I've had this problem too and as rmp says, it still seems to be a bug in watchOS 1.0.1. The problem appears when you try to reload your tableView after run willActivate() and nothing will happen.
In my case, I reload the tableView after receive a reply from a delegate and then I reload all the content just if it's necessary. To achieve this, I remove all rows from a NSIndexSet and load again.
if isNecessary {
self.table.removeRowsAtIndexes(NSIndexSet(indexesInRange: NSMakeRange(0, maxItems)))
isNecessary = false
}
I've tried a lot of tricks but none has worked for me:
Force to reload rows by table.setNumberOfRows(0, withRowType: "data")
Setting parameters to empty text before assign new values
One thing you could do is to hide tableView before removing rows, and avoid the remove animation.
It is a bug in WatchKit. Seems like Apple doesn't handle the repetitive interface object correctly.
The general principle here is: Only insert or remove necessary rows after a table is created. Do not reload the whole table like what we usually do in iOS. It just doesn't work (or trigger the bug).
So specifically, you have to:
Do this in willActivated method. This is correct.
If this is the first load, before the table is even created, do what you are now doing – load all table rows.
For all following times, don't reload the table, fetch the new data and check the desired number of rows.
Compare with the current number of rows in the table, insert to or remove from the bottom of the existing table.
Now simply re-assign the new data to all existing rows. Again, do not reload.
It should work if you follow the above steps.
I have found what works best given the current state of watchkit is to remove all rows then re-populate the table.
Try something like this:
- (void)loadTableData{
//clear the table
[mainTableView setNumberOfRows:0 withRowType:#"myTableRow"];
//set the row count again
[mainTableView setNumberOfRows:numberOfRows withRowType:#"myTableRow"];
//populate table
}
Its pretty simple. As Apple hasn't provided any method to reload the data.
You can still achieve that by simply populating the rows for the tableview.
Below is the sample code:
for index in 0..<tracksTableView.numberOfRows {
if let controller = tracksTableView.rowController(at: index) as? EditPlaylistRowController {
controller.playingTrackId = self.playingTrackID
controller.sharedTrack = trackItems[index]
}
}
Use it whenever you want to refresh the data.
NOTE:
You can still make some conditional statements inside the row controller class.
Happy to help :)
I want to say that my code works correctly but i don't know why it is working like that. So to make it clear, here is my code:
List<NewsFlash> newsfl = tsm.getNewsFlashes();
foreach (NewsFlash item in newsfl)
{
item.smartform.dtDate = item.smartform.dtDate.ToShortDateString();
}
//Get all the newsFlash items and bind to the repeater
rptNewsFlash.DataSource = newsfl;
rptNewsFlash.DataBind();
Like you can see, I am looping the list newsfl and I am editing item.smartform.dtDate. What is weird for me is, when I edit item.smartform.dtDate, then the property dtDate in the list newsfl is also changed. This is what I want, but it is kind of weird I think, because item within the foreach loop has nothing to do with the list newsfl?
Hope you understand my question.
Thanks
Each item in the foreach is just a reference to the item at a specific index within newsfl - so when your loop is done, you've updated all the item's in the list, and those items hang onto those changes. This makes sense because each item is not a copy of the original, it is the original.
So, imagine item and newsfl[n] as two doors to the same room, you end up in the same place - and it doesn't matter which door I arrive through, if I start moving furniture around, it is also moved for anyone who comes in through either door.
On another note, if this didn't happen, then what would you expect to happen? Since you make changes to item, surely you want to keep them?
In the line foreach (NewsFlash item in newsfl) you take a reference, called item, to each of the entries in newsfl. This doesn't create a copy of the item, just a reference to the item in the list.
That way if you update a value on item, the entry in newfl will also be updated.
Why shouldn't it be changed? The object "item" in your foreach loop is exactly the same object as the one in your "newsfl" list. Actually the object "item" only points to the correct object in the list.
I have been tasked with sifting through the worst classic asp spaghetti i've ever come across.
The script runs a series of recordsets in sequence, getting 1 record at a time. As the record is built it takes the id and passes it to the next loop, which gets data, and passes on the id to the next loop. It then continues in this manner and builds an unordered list, kicking out the required html as it goes.
Here are my efforts so far:
have a class delivering data via sqldatareaders and output these to nested repeaters (this failed due to not being able to loop and get the id)
Have a datatable populated with all the required data, then datatable.select to filter it out.
have 4 datareaders looping and building the ul arraylists (I
couldnt get the id's to match up)
Please can you suggest the best method
Yes of course it can be rewritten in ASP.NET - note that i said rewritten, not just refactored, there is no saving that code (which is okay for what it does, but things are different with ASP.NET).
To be honest, i didn't even check the code, it hurt my eyes. A lot. But in general you can use a nice SQLConnection object, and a SQLCommand, call a stored procedure and get a nice SqlDataReader full of data from which you can build a DataTable or an IEnumerable list of data objects. You then have a repeater type control (ListView, GridView etc) in the UI, simply by binding your datatable or list to that control will render the results.
With the ListView, you specify a template for each data item that is rendered. For a GridView you specify the columns (or column templates) and which properties on each data item the columns should bind to.
When you retrieve the data, you can leave it as a DataTable, or translate it into something else like a list (or array) of data objects. As long as your list/array implements IEnumerable you should be able to just assign the list to the ItemsSource property of the aforementioned repeater control and it will perform its magic.
You don't even have to use a SQLCommand and DataTable object - you could even use Linq to SQL and bind the results straight to your repeater control.
This is just a high level overview of how you could do it, there are a couple of different ways. Once done, your code is going to be way cleaner and more maintainable than the classic ASP code.
Edit: your main issue is how to produce an ordered list, which is what the current code is doing with its nested loops supplying IDs for the detail items.
I would suggest you take a step back, and rethink the sql. In fact, throw the current sql away, it is incredibly inefficient with the tools you have today. It takes literally tenths of a second, and just one database call to return a flat table of data. Your first instinct may be "but i don't want to return too much data!" - relax, even returning several thousand data rows can be a sub 1 second operation if done correctly. You can also restrict the returned data by passing parameters in to the stored proc, or appending them to the dynamic sql statement that you construct (although it pains me hugely to mention dynamic sql, i think it is evil, but some people still use it - i would not recommend it unless it was your only option). To sum up what i am saying, how your data is returned from the database and how it looks on screen are two different things, don't let one guide the other. You can get the data from the database, then manipulate it before rendering it to the UI.
If you still want to show the data as an ordered list, then use a ListView, define a template for each data item, then you can use LINQ to group or filter the data you like (the data item template can contain whatever HTML or ASP.NET controls you like, and that template gets rendered for each data item in the list of data). Alternatively, you could use a GridView, and then use the grouping capability of the GridView to do the work for you - just specify which column(s) you want to group on, and the GridView takes care of the rendering.
I have a selection list that is generated dynamically, it lists a number of checkboxes that are based on an end-user editable table, as such I have no idea what data, or how much, might be contained in this table and how many checkboxes or what they might contain, other than the primary keys of the table.
The user will select the checks they wish to see, and then control is passed to another page via PostBackUrl. The second page has to figure out which records to show (build it's where clause) based on the checkboxes checked in the previous page.
So, my problem is several-fold. First, asp:CheckBoxes don't have values. This can be worked around by a number of methods. Right now, i'm using a placeholder and dynamically creating the checkboxes in the ItemDataBound event of the DataList. I set the ID to "CheckboxKey1Key2" (where Key1 and Key2 are the primary keys of the check items).
Second, I have to walk through the controls of the PreviousPage to dig out all these values. That in itself is also a pain, but doable.
Now, my thinking is to build the where clause of my Linq2Sql query based on the keys I got from decoding the checked checkbox names. This all seems like a lot of jumping through hoops for something that shouldn't be this difficult. Am I missing something? Does anyone have any better solutions?
Make a class with a structure for your values that will be useful and easy for you to use on the result page. Then when the user clicks whatever it is they click to go to the result page, loop through the DataList, create a collection from the checked items, and you will only need to grab one object instead of everything, when you need to format your query.
Then when you get to the result page, loop through the collection and build the query in the loop. Pretty easy and not much code.