How to create a Static Table in WatchKit - watchkit

I am creating a table in my WatchKit app but I want it to be a static table.
How do I configure the table so it's static? I looked in the attributes inspector but there is no setting to change a dynamic table to a static table.

You can't, at present, since watchOS WKInterface tables are dynamic: they require you to programmatically configure both the number of rows and the row controllers.
You could file a feature request with Apple. In the meantime, you could either
configure your table programmatically (which would involve setting up a custom row for each different type of static row), or
just drag groups and their controls to the storyboard, to represent each static row. Depending on the controls, you may have to tweak the group height and background color to make the groups consistently look like an WKInterfaceTable.
The first option would require more code and classes. The second, while much simpler, is more fragile, as it would rely on Apple not changing the appearance for their table row.
Alternatively, you could wait for the new watch OS to be presented at WWDC in a few weeks before making any decision.

Related

Dynamically changing component arrangment in QML

What would be the preferred (recommended) way to rearrange the components of a QML UI on an event such as a button click?
I do have designed a UI consisting of a bunch of custom components, each of them is bound to a (C++) model. I use anchors to position the components in the ApplicationWindow.
On a button click, I want to add an additional component which, due to its size, makes it necessary to rearrange the existing components. Actually, the button could be understood as switching into a different mode such as the Debug view in an IDE (think of Eclipse).
My goal is to keep the components in a consistent state between views and make the switch as fluent as possible.
I could think of these options:
Design two different views, and use a Loader or State to switch between them. As initializing the models takes some time, they should remain not be deleted during switching. I think, setting them as ContextProperty of the QMLApplicationEngine should take care of that.
Do a lot of rearranging in the onClicked()-Handler of the button. Probably the worst solution but does not require to reinitialize the components and models.
I think the most elegant solution would be to initialize the components in a some kind of container (or model) and then assign different layouts to this container on button click. But I have no idea, if this is possible and how to achieve that.
Edit: I followed approach 1. by using the StackLayout. It works basically, but it seems as if the invisible UI is still running in the background and consuming resources (e.g. requesting Images from my QQuickImageProvider).
Using a Loader eliminates this problem as it destroys the previous UI on every change of the source property. What I do like about the StackLayout however is that it preloads all UIs on app startup. So the transitions are smoother compared to the Loader. Is there a way to disable the invisible UIs?
Your option (1) is the one giving your the most flexibility, since you have two entirely separate UIs depending on state.
As you already discovered yourself this requires keeping all relevant state data in a way that is accessible by both UIs, e.g. in C++ or in globally accessible QML/Script objects.
I would go for that if you envision any more changes or tweaks than just rearranging elements.
If you are sure that rearranging elements will be sufficient, have a look at QML states
It is a bit like a combination of your options (2) and (3).
The state setup allows you very locally to define anchors and other properties for each element depending on a named state.
The button's signal handler then only needs to change which of the states is active, by assigning one of the names to the respective state property.

How can You refresh a vaadin grid after data change

How can You refresh a grid, when some new row was added to its datasoruce container or one of its rows has been edited?
I have tried the hacks written about here (http://www.helpsforcoder.com/code/31861375-vaadin-refresh-grid-after-row-modification.html ) and here (deleted link to malicious advertisement) but with no positive result. I add / edit the row in a separate subwindow that 'pop-ups' over the view, where the grid, that should update its contents, is placed.
grid.getDataProvider().refreshAll();
Grid listens to changed property values. So if you are working on the property level of vaadin everything should be fine.
If you extract your bean out of the BeanItemContainer you directly manipulate the values of the bean. That way the property container can not recognize your manipluating action.
So you have to send your grid implementation a message, the properties have changed manually.
When your BeanItemContainer still has the hard reference to the changed object, grid.markAsDirty() should work.

Clarification of WatchKit Performance tip regarding scene simplification

Can anyone clarify this statement from the WatchKit Development Tips page?
Simplify controller scenes.
Reduce the number of hidden objects as much as possible to significantly improve load time. For example, five versions of a controller’s layout in a single controller scene will result in all objects being created before the controller is displayed
I've read it a few dozen times now and can't figure out what it's trying to say.
What is a "scene"? Is it referring to the Storyboard scene?
Are "hidden objects" referring to literally hidden UI elements like a hidden button?
How is it possible to have five versions of a controller's layout? This just does not compute.
When a storyboard is loaded, and there are, say, 10 different WKInterfaceControllers in the file, will that be very slow even if the initial controller is blank? Aren't these only loaded as-needed? Or, would it be better to have a single table with 10 prototype rows - each of which is actually a stand-alone interface - which are only instantiated one at a time?
Because we can't programmatically add interface elements to controllers in the current version of WatchKit, any interface elements that we might need to display must be included in a Storyboard scene. By including these initially-hidden elements, we can programmatically hide or unhide these elements as needed.
For example, it's common to include a full-screen label that is initially hidden. Then, if a full-screen message needs to be shown for some reason, the text is populated, the label is unhidden, and the rest of the elements on the screen are hidden. To make hiding a set of elements easier, they're typically included in a WKInterfaceGroup, so that only the top-level group element needs to be hidden.
So, to answer your questions:
Indeed, a "scene" is a standard Storyboard scene.
Yes, "hidden objects" is referring to literally hidden objects as I've described above.
Using the method I've described, you could create five top-level WKInterfaceGroup elements, each with its own set of controls and layout. Then, you'd likely unhide the one that makes sense to display and hide all the others.
I use these techniques in my own app, though I typically don't have more than three top-level groups.
So yes, because it takes time to initialize and layout all of these elements (even if they're hidden), the recommendation is to keep it to a minimum.
Regarding the loading of interface controllers in a storyboard, you're correct that only the interface controllers that are needed are loaded. However, if you have a set of five page-based controllers, they'll all be loaded and initialized before the first page is activated. Other controllers would then be loaded as appropriate.
Creating unique rows is another possibility, but whether you do that or simply hide/unhide top-level groups depends on your app's specific needs. As always, it's worth testing on actual hardware.

Edit static grouped table view with multiple sections in Xcode Storyboard

In XCode storyboard, it is possible to Edit the cells in table view if it's static. Is it possible to enter multiple section of data (that is in group view multiple groups) right under Storyboard, or do I need to use the data source delegate instead?
I'm not sure if I quite understand the question, but if you're asking if you can do everything in Interface Builder, the answer is yes. After you've set the table content to 'static cells' in the Attribute Inspector, set the number of sections to the number of data sections you want, then modify each section by selecting the section, changing the header, footer, and number of rows. You can also quickly edit the header by double-clicking on it.
Each row in the section can be modified in the same way.

ASP.NET Dynamic Menu

I have to create a Dynamic menu in ASP.NET. I want to use dynamic LinkButtons (or can be a Menu Control), but should be appended with sequence numbers. Eg: 1,2,3a 3b etc..and these sequcenes could be dynamic. Any idea. I used a repeater with a label and LinkButton in it, but having problems with view state. Any idea how to append sequence to menu??
Essentially, you have two paradigms with web applications, at least from this conversation's standpoint.
Stream out the HTML, creating it as you stream
Create containers that can bind to data and shape the data
Your concept seems to be "only #1 is dynamic", but that is not true. Any time you can change the data and get a different output, you are dealing with something dynamic. My personal feeling is shape the menu data prior to binding. This cannot always be done, but more oft than not, it can. The second method would be to attach to an event like a item binding or row binding event. Controlling the HTML stream and writing out individual items is generally my last resort.
Now to the viewstate issue. Viewstate is a bastard when you start adding things to an item after binding and semi-problematic when you are playing the dynamic game from #1 above. The problem is things added after the initial definition cannot easily be set up with automagic bits. You end up having to rebind each time. This is why shaping data and then binding is superior. Even in cases where you have to rebuild, you can cache the shaped data and quickly rebind. It takes more "up front" work, but is less problematic.
The actual container you are binding with is inconsequential. Unless you can't use the menu control for some reason (other than having to dynamically add, which can be solved by playing with the bound data), I would head this direction. Actually, I would head this direction and use the CSS friendly adapters so you can alter the look and feel more easily. :-)

Resources