I want to display quite a bit of demographic data for a certain pin when someone touches on it, so providing a pop-up isn't going to cut it. I figured once the pin is touched I will just stick a tableviewController onto the NavigationController and the table view will have access to the object and display the single objects information, with one item per row and 1 section.
Anyway I'm having a hard time figuring out MKMapViewDelegates methods as it appears none of them do what I need and/or allow me to return a tableview or push that view onto the navigation controller.
I played around with:
- (MKAnnotationView *)mapView:(MKMapView *)mapView viewForAnnotation:(id <MKAnnotation>)annotation;
But that requires a MKAnnotationView be returned and I really just need this method to work by showing the user a table view of all the data. I was hoping for something simple like a userDidTouchPin method....
Anyone have any ideas how to accomplish what I am trying to do?
If you want to do something when the user selects the pin (and not a button on its callout), then implement the mapView:didSelectAnnotationView: delegate method and present or push your detail view controller there.
The selected annotation object is available as the annotation property of the view parameter:
- (void)mapView:(MKMapView *)mapView
didSelectAnnotationView:(MKAnnotationView *)view
{
YourDetailViewController *dvc = [[YourDetailViewController alloc] init...
dvc.annotation = view.annotation;
//present or push here
[dvc release];
}
You might need to check which type of annotation was selected (eg. if MKUserLocation was selected do nothing, etc) and you might need to cast the view.annotation to your own annotation class to easily access any custom properties you may have.
Related
I'm creating a customization where on a click of a button, I need to allocate a charge for a particular purchase order / invoice journal.
From the front end, I would accomplish this by following the purchase order life-cycle and invoicing it. I would then go under the invoice tab of the PO, click Invoice Journals -> Charges -> Adjustment . This will open up my desired form where I will select a charges code, charges value, currency and category, and then I will click 'Ok' and have the system take care of the rest of the process.
Form name: MarkupAllocation_VendInvoiceTrans
Parent form Name: VendInvoiceJournal
You can see that the child form gets called with a few parameters such as the invoice number, there obviously needs to be that link. If I go into the AOT under forms, I right click and open up VendInvoiceJournal, but I wouldn't be able to open up MarkupAllocation_VendInvoiceTrans because it requires parameters.
Objective:
A: To open MarkupAllocation_VendInvoiceTrans through code where I manually pass those parameters to link to the parent table. I would provide the invoice number and such. The objective is to skip opening the parent table and manually going into the adjustments. I want to open that form directly and have it link to whichever record I specify.
B: I need to be able to pass a _ChargesValue parameter and have that be pre-populated for me. I don't know if this is possible, so I wanted to ask and confer. Ideally, I should be able to click a button on my custom form, and have MarkupAllocation_VendInvoiceTrans form directly open for a specified invoice, with pre-populated values on the line.
I know I should be tackling this problem one step at a time, so step A is priority number one.
I can open up the parent form with relative ease like so, but I cannot do the same for the child form. Obviously the same time of approach won't work, as I need to specify the relationship of the parent table before I open it.
private void allocateMarkup()
{
Object formRun;
Args args = new Args();
VendInvoiceJour jourTable;
;
select * from jourTable where jourTable.PurchId == 'PO000001191';
args.name(formstr(VendInvoiceJournal));
args.record(jourTable);
formRun = ClassFactory.formRunClass(args);
formRun.init();
formRun.run();
formRun.wait();
}
How would I be able to do so?
(Side note, I realize this whole form calling could be avoided if do all the transactions programmatically instead of letting the out of the box functionality handle it, but the markup and allocation logic is a beast of it's own and to me seems much more complicated than doing this. If someone has done it this manual way, any help on that would be greatly appreciated as well)
If I read your post right, you just want to open the Charges>Adjustment for a certain invoice. Here is one simple method:
MarkupAdjustment markupAdjustment = new MarkupAdjustment();
markupAdjustment.vendInvoiceJour(VendInvoiceJour::findFromPurchId('PO 120079'));
markupAdjustment.run();
We created a small painting application in JavaFX. A new requirement arose, where we have to warn the user, that he made changes, which are not yet persisted and asking him, if the user might like to save first before closing.
Sample Snapshot:
Unfortunately there are a lot of different Nodes, and Nodes can be changed in many ways, like for example a Polygon point can move. The Node itself can be dragged. They can be rotated and many more. So before firing a zillion events for every possible change of a Node object to the canvas I`d like to ask, if anyone might have an idea on how to simplify this approach. I am curious, if there are any listeners, that I can listen to any changes of the canvas object within the scene graph of JavaFX.
Especially since I just want to know if anything has changed and not really need to know the specific change.
Moreover, I also do not want to get every single event, like a simple select, which causes a border to be shown around the selected node (like shown on the image), which does not necessary mean, that the user has to save his application before leaving.
Anyone have an idea? Or do I really need to fire Events for every single change within a Node?
I think you are approaching this problem in the wrong way. The nodes displayed on screen should just be a visual representation of an underlying model. All you really need to know is that the underlying model has changed.
If, for example, you were writing a text editor, the text displayed on the screen would be backed by some sort of model. Let's assume the model is a String. You wouldn't need to check if any of the text nodes displayed on screen had changed you would just need to compare the original string data with the current string data to determine if you need to prompt the user to save.
Benjamin's answer is probably the best one here: you should use an underlying model, and that model can easily check if relevant state has changed. At some point in the development of your application, you will come to the point where you realize this is the correct way to do things. It seems like you have reached that point.
However, if you want to delay the inevitable redesign of your application a little further (and make it a bit more painful when you do get to that point ;) ), here's another approach you might consider.
Obviously, you have some kind of Pane that is holding the objects that are being painted. The user must be creating those objects and you're adding them to the pane at some point. Just create a method that handles that addition, and registers an invalidation listener with the properties of interest when you do. The structure will look something like this:
private final ReadOnlyBooleanWrapper unsavedChanges =
new ReadOnlyBooleanWrapper(this, "unsavedChanged", false);
private final ChangeListener<Object> unsavedChangeListener =
(obs, oldValue, newValue) -> unsavedChanges.set(true);
private Pane drawingPane ;
// ...
Button saveButton = new Button("Save");
saveButton.disableProperty().bind(unsavedChanges.not());
// ...
#SafeVarArgs
private final <T extends Node> void addNodeToDrawingPane(
T node, Function<T, ObservableValue<?>>... properties) {
Stream.of(properties).forEach(
property -> property.apply(node).addListener(unsavedChangeListener));
drawingPane.getChildren().add(node);
}
Now you can do things like
Rectangle rect = new Rectangle();
addNodeToDrawingPane(rect,
Rectangle::xProperty, Rectangle::yProperty,
Rectangle::widthProperty, Rectangle::heightProperty);
and
Text text = new Text();
addNodeToDrawingPane(text,
Text::xProperty, Text::yProperty, Text::textProperty);
I.e. you just specify the properties to observe when you add the new node. You can create a remove method which removes the listener too. The amount of extra code on top of what you already have is pretty minimal, as (probably, I haven't seen your code) is the refactoring.
Again, you should really have a separate view model, etc. I wanted to post this to show that #kleopatra's first comment on the question ("Listen for invalidation of relevant state") doesn't necessarily involve a lot of work if you approach it in the right way. At first, I thought this approach was incompatible with #Tomas Mikula's mention of undo/redo functionality, but you may even be able to use this approach as a basis for that too.
I have a simple master/details relationship where one order can have multiple revenue allocations. The order has a collection that contains these.
I want to sum a property in my revenue allocation objects and ensure that it adds up to my order total. However, if I databind on the count property of the allocations collection this gets called when you first add an empty object and not when that object has been populated. So an empty allocation is added at the time the "Add allocation" screen is created and the databind function called. That of course means that when the save button on the "Add allocation" screen is clicked, the databind function isn't called again.
Anyone got any ideas? I basically want my databind function to be called when the save button is clicked in the "add screen" and not before.
This is the HTML client - NOT Silverlight
I'm pretty sure that the solution would be to use an OData query to get your aggregate data within the databinding function of the save button - or perhaps a separate button (e.g. "Tally Order Totals"). Exactly how you do that? A bit too hard for me to answer right now, but start with a new button TallyOrderTotals and a new data field for your total. Edit the post_render event for TallyOrderTotals and lookup the allocations in the javascript in which you data bind the value of the new data field.
Somewhere you will need a piece of code that looks something like this:
myapp.activeDataWorkSpace.<datasource>.RevenueAllocations
.filter("OrderID eq " + msls._toODataString(<orderID>, ":String"))
.execute()
.then(function (result) {
// assign the result somewhere
}
I'm not saying that's something you can cut-and-paste - but definitely look at the msls.js documentation and see what you can do with querying your data inside the event context.
One quick point however - if you only need to calculate that total as a verification step, consider doing it in the SaveExecuting() event on the server side. This will allow you to throw an exception back up the tree to your HTML page which the msls.js script should render on the client side.
Hope that helps. :)
My problem is with an iOS 6 tabbed application. My work-in-progress has 5 tabs and several tabs are gateways to other view controllers. Most pages need access to a Model object, which contains data stored as arrays, strings, and so on. A bare-bones model is populated at runtime and the user can add to it throughout the application lifespan. For example, the code listed below is from my AppDelegate file , where it is passing a pointer to the bare-bones Model to the Project View Controller. This works fine: the tab application uses the navigation controller array stack; because I know the Project page is at index 2, I can send the model to it.
My problem has to do with the sub views of the Project page. For example, as a sub view to the Project page there is (or should be) a File_IO page where the user handles file operations. The File_IO page also needs access to the Model object. But when I try to send the Model pointer from the Project page to the File_IO page, the technique I used previously (from the AppDelegate to the Project) does not work. I point to an empty Model in the FileIO ViewController.
Example code: this is in the AppDelegate, and it works fine: the bare-bones Model in the Project ViewController is populated with the data.
//To the Project View Controller...
UINavigationController *project_NavigationController =
[[tabBarController viewControllers] objectAtIndex:2];
Project_ViewController *project_ViewController =
[[project_NavigationController viewControllers] objectAtIndex:0];
//This hides the navigation bar on the project page but it also removes the bar on any subsequent pages! They need to be programmmatically reset in ViewDidLoad.
[project_NavigationController setNavigationBarHidden:YES animated:YES];
project_ViewController.currentGeoModel = newGeoModel;
Now, my Project_ViewController is embedded in a NavigationController and has 4 child ViweControllers. One is named FileIO_ViewController. I want to pass the currentModel from the Project_ViewController to the FileIO_ViewController. Under the - (void)viewDidLoad method I have tried a number of things, which do not work. For example,
UINavigationController *project_NavigationController = (UINavigationController *) self.presentedViewController;
FileIO_ViewController *fileIO_ViewController = [[project_NavigationController viewControllers] objectAtIndex:1];
fileIO_ViewController.currentModel = currentModel;
compiles but when I try to access currentModel inside the FileIO_ViewController methods, it is empty.
If anyone can take the time to help I would be very appreciative. The best answer for me would be in the form of an explicit code example showing how to pass the pointer to an object like my Model from a ViewController to another ViewController where you do not explicitly know where in the stack the child VC lies. (In my example I used Index 1 but I do not actually know at which Index the FileIO_ViewController lives as I have three other ViewControllers under the Project_ViewController. I've tried several integers with no success.)
If you do answer this, please consider me a New Guy when it comes to iOS 6 and objective C -- climbing Mount Apple has been a long haul and I isn't anywhere near the top yet!
Thanks
Tim Redfield
Norway
If you have a shared single model for your app, you shouldn't proactively pass the pointer around, you should make the model available from a single location and leave it to individual objects to access this same model when they need to. A good location for your model pointer is in your Application delegate.
In the appDelegate's .h file, declare a property for your model:
//appDelegate.h
#property (nonatomic, strong) MyAppModel* appModel;
After you instantiate your model in the appDelegate, just assign it to the property:
//appDelegate.m
- (BOOL)application:(UIApplication *)application
didFinishLaunchingWithOptions:(NSDictionary *)launchOptions {
self.appModel = [[MyAppModel alloc] init];
//set up bare-bones appModel here
return YES;
}
Then you can access this property from any viewController that needs model data thus:
#import appDelegate.h;
AppDelegate* appDelegate = [UIApplication sharedApplication] delegate;
MyModel* model = appDelegate.model
(Better still, make the model object into it's own Singleton object, but using the appDelegate will get you started)
If you need to pass models around, then you need to take care that you are passing them to the right object. This is where your existing code is breaking. For example you are making many assumptions about the structure of a NavigationController stack. But whenever you move back down a stack by popping a controller off the top, you lose that top controller instance completely. When you 'return' to that controller by going forwards on the stack, in fact a new instance is created (unless you have taken care to keep a pointer hanging around and make sure to push to that pointer). If you need more help on this aspect, you will need to describe exactly the layout of your app, and how you are creating your viewControllers, navigationController stack, etc.
update (following your comments)
If your changes to the model are valid throughout the app, then I don't see why you can't just access the model when you need to from wherever you happen to be in the app via appDelegate.model. If you have concurrent versions of the model, you could look at making a singleton data manager object which could handle the details of storing an array of models (or a model history) and providing the correct model as per request. The principle is the same - rather than proactively passing model objects into your viewControllers, let them request data from a centralised source as they need it.
Regarding your description "Now, my Project_ViewController is embedded in a NavigationController and has 4 child ViewControllers.", I don't think you have quite grasped the distinction between Classes, Storyboard scenes, and instances.
You have this arrangement in a part of your storyboard:
UINavigationController
| push push push
|->UIViewController1 -----> UIViewController2 -----> UIViewController3 ----->
segue segue segue
You talk about passing data directly from VC1 (say) to VC3 by accessing the NavController's stack.
What you need to consider is that the storyboard describes a template showing how instances will interrelate when they are instantiated. They are not instantiated just because the storyboard is loaded. When you have arrived at VC1, the ability to segue to VC2 and VC3 is laid out before you in the template, but neither VC2 nor VC3 - as instances - exist until you initiate the segue. The segue process instantiates it's destinationViewController Therefore it makes no sense to pass data from VC1 directly into VC3. When you are at VC1, the navController's stack only contains one item (a VC1 instance); when you segue to VC2, it then contains instances of VC1 and VC2, and it is only when you actually segue to VC3 that the instance is created and placed in the stack.
Stepping through your code:
UINavigationController *project_NavigationController =
(UINavigationController *) self.presentedViewController;
the presentedViewController property works with modal segues, where you have a presenting, and a presented, view Controller. NavControllers on the other hand work with push segues (as they push child viewControllers onto their viewControllers stack, which is where you can obtain pointers to them from).
In this context, self.presentedViewController is nil, which you are assigning to a new variable. The code does nothing, but the compiler won't complain.
FileIO_ViewController *fileIO_ViewController =
[[project_NavigationController viewControllers] objectAtIndex:1];
project_NavigationControlle is nil, so it's properties are all nil. fileIO_ViewController gets nil.
Likewise in the last line you are sending a message to nil, which is not an error, but faintly redundant.
How can I refresh view after a certain event?
I have a view which contains multiple groups. I want to show or hide some groups.
onCreationComplete() or initialize() method works only at the beginning of the view creation.
Try invalidateDisplayList() on the view
Let me know if that doesn't do the trick and we'll try some other tricks.
I personally don't like the answer that says to call invalidateDisplayList (sorry no offense Nate nothing personal). I feel it's too vague and doesn't explain what this does under the hood and furthermore you shouldn't have to call it directly in cases such as the one explained in the OPs question. You can simply create booleans that are bindable for each of the groups you'd like to show/hide then in the event handler set those booleans to the appropriate value and if they are bound to the visible and include in layout properties of the containers those containers will internally call invalidateDisplayList after calling set visible and consequently commitProperties.
This is basically what happens under the hood as I understand it: The way this works is values aren't committed or used to update the display until the next frame this way it doesn't get bogged down doing unnecessary layout calculations. So you update the bindable property which fires an event which triggers a notification in the listener (in this case a function that sets the property on your control), that in turn passes along the value to the control which sets an internal flag to update the property and calls invalidateProperties. When it hits the next frame redraw it sees that the properties flag is dirty (true) and then calls commitProperties, this computes/sets the appropriate values (possibly also invalidating then "fixing" the size using invalidateSize() and measure()) and calls invalidateDisplayList, then during the same frame it sees that the display list flag is dirty so it calls updateDisplayList, here it uses the values of the properties to draw appropriately.
You should also be able to achieve this using states, which add or remove children from the display list based on an array of "actions" for each state.