I have a table that is wider than the page width. How can I change the font size or table width so that it fits on the page? The second question is, how do I set the table in portrait orientation?
Here is a part from the alpha.csv file
alpha,beta,gamma,delta,epsilon,Zeta,Eta,Theta
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8
Part of the csv files longer as 800 lines. The name of the csv file is alpha.csv.
.TS H
center, allbox, tab(,);
c s s s s s s s
c c c c c c c c
c c c n n n n n .
This is the line with I can see on all pages
_
.TH
.so alpha.csv
.TE
You might try
1) Renaming your column headers
2) Change the font point size for the headers
.TS H
center, allbox, tab(,);
cp-4 s s s s s s s
c c c c c c c c
c c c n n n n n .
3) Use all lower case for headers (upper case takes up more width)
4) Change your table to list text vertically instead of horizontally, so the header columns only take one char width each
5) Rotate your table so that the headers 'alpha, beta, ...' will appear as the first column
Related
I have a scenario like this:
/-> C -> D \
A -> B - -> G (Contain values of D and F,
\-> E -> F /
Basically at G I have a list of value produce by D and F, let us call D1 and F1.
To create a new value from G, I have to just unwind to B and user can either choose branch C or E and continue to the end G with value of D2 or F2, or he can pop back to A. Let us say the new value is F2, though ABEFG
Now I'm facing a problem, that is I want to edit the values at G, let us say D1.
I want to be able to pop back to D but also allow users pop back to C etc, but D is not in the workflow ABEFG.
My guess is that I have to back up to B and somehow prepare multiple segues up to D but I have no idea if this kind of workflow exists.
Apparently, there is no such way. The solution I found is
Find the instance of B in navigationController!.viewControllers
popToViewController B
Initiate C & D from Main storyboard with identifier (they are already deallocated anyway)
Setup some properties of C & D from D1
pushViewController C & D
How can I find or generate data points form a shape in 2D in MATLAB ? For example, the letters A, B, and C.
You can use fill()
An example for an octogon, provided by
See https://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/ref/fill.html
% Generate the points required for the fill.
t = (1/16:1/8:1)'*2*pi; % using 1/8 steps we get an 8 sided object.
x = cos(t);
y = sin(t);
% fill the data
fill(x,y,'r')
axis square % prevent skewing the result.
An example of generating the x y coordinates of a rectangle with an offset of (5,5):
x=[5 5 25 25 5]
y=[5 15 15 5 5]
You have 5 points because you need to include the final point to complete the path ( I believe ) Follow the blue path when collecting the x coordinates and the y coordinates. You can see we start at 5,5 then move to 5,15 --- so the first part of the path is
x=[5 5 ...
y=[5 15 ...
If you want to generate the coordinates automatically, you could use a program like InkScape (vector program) to help you convert a character to paths, but here is a simple example drawn with the pen tool:
The points are given by
m 0,1052.3622 5,-10 5,0 5,10 z
which 1052.3622 is VERY large, but is ultimately because I placed my shape at the bottom of the page. if we set this to be 0,0 it would go to the top of the page.
I'm developing a rudimentary word finder app with sql and ruby where I have an array of letters to find available words. It's easier to make the query by narrowing down what alphabetic letters aren't in the array. For ex.
alphabet= %w{a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z}
available_letters = %w{p k z l p m t l n g g r u a r t n d z w a l m n e}
I can then subtract from alphabet, letters to exclude from my search and end up with an sql query like the one below.
select * from words
where word not like '%b%' and word not like '%c%' and word not like '%f%'.....
This gives me all the available words with a combination of all available letters. It does not narrow them down by the number of times that letter occurs. So if I only have one "E", I would like the query to narrow down words that only contain one e. I'm not sure if this can be done with an sql query or whether I will need to use a procedure. Anyone know a good way of solving this?
You will probably want to look into faster ways of implementing this, but to answer your question, you can exclude words with more than one "e" with not like '%e%e%'.
I'm really hoping I can describe this question in an understandable way. This is a puzzle that I have not been able to begin to solve even though I (mostly) understand it. I'm just not sure where to start, and I'm really hoping someone out there can get me headed in the right direction.
I have a LARGE table of data. It describes relationships between objects. Let's say the Y-axis has items numbered 1-1000, and the X-axis has items 1-1000 also. If item #234 on the Y-axis is related to item #791 on X, there will be a mark in the table where the row and column cross. In some industries this is referred to an a Truth Table. One can, at a glance, see how many items in a system relate to each other. The marks in the table can help to identify trends and patterns.
Here's some other helpful stuff about the nature of the table:
The full range of the number of relationships (r) for each item on either axis can be 1 <= r <= axisTotal.
The X and Y axis will share common items, but each axis will also have items that the other axis does not.
Each item will only exist once per axis. It can be on X and Y, but it would only be on each one 1 time.
The total number of items on each axis will most likely NOT be equal. Each axis could have from 50 to 1000's of items.
The end result is that this is going to be a report that needs to be printed. We have successfully printed a table that had about 100-150 items on each axis on an 11in X 17in piece of paper. Any more than that and it begins to be so small it's unreadable.
What I am trying to do is split the super large tables into smaller tables, but related points need to stay together. If I grab item 1-100 on X then I would need each item they relate to from Y.
I've generated a number of these tables and, while the number of relationships CAN be arbitrary, I have never seen an item relate to all other items. So in real practice the range is more like 1 <= r <= (10% * axisTotal). If an item's relationships exceed this range, it can be split up into multiple tables, but that is not optimal at all.
At the end of the day I think we, and our clients, would be happy if a 1000x1000 item table was split into 8 to 10 printed pages of smaller, related tables.
Any guidance would be a great help! Thanks.
---EDIT---
One other thing worth noting, there will be no empty rows or columns in the table. Every item on both the x and y axis will relate to at least 1 item on the opposite axis.
---EDIT---
Here is an example of a small truth table that I'm describing: . Every row and column has at least one relationship.
---EDIT---
May 18th, 2011
For what it's worth, I was moving pretty good on this project and I got pulled off for a couple of weeks. So it's going to a little while before I get back to this problem. But it is one that I will have to solve soon.
---EDIT---
July 11th, 2011
Bummer. Well, looks like I'm not going to be able to solve this problem right now. I was really hoping to be able to figure this out. Through discussion we decided to present the truth table in an Excel spreadsheet as an add-on resource to the main report. Excel 2007 and later will handle 1000's of columns which will more than suffice. Plus, we added some VBA which allows the viewer to double click on the column titles. This action will reduce the rows to only ones where there are interactions. Then it removes empty columns. In this way they can see a small sub-table based on the item they want to view, and can print it if they want.
This isn't an answer, I just want to try to visualize your data a little better. Does it kind of look like this?
Alice Bob Charlie ... Zelda
Shoes X X
Hats X X
Gloves X
...
Pants X
EDIT
Is it a requirement to show the data in tabular format? Or could you just list each out? Something like:
Alice
Shoes
Bob
Hats
Pants
Charlie
Shoes
Gloves
Zelda
Hats
Or the other way:
Shoes
Alice
Charlie
Hats
Bob
Zelda
Gloves
Charlie
Pants
Bob
EDIT 2
Okay, I've made another larger truth table to hopefully get a better understanding of how you want to split things up:
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
1 x x x x
2 x x x x x x
3 x x x x
4 x x x
5 x x x
6 x x x
7 x x x
8 x x x
For argument's sake lets just say that you can only fit 4 rows on a page (because I don't feel like typing out a giant table this early in the morning) so we're going to split this into two pages. First, it is important to show every row, right? Second, do you need to show columns that never have a value. For instance Y and Z never have a value for rows 1 through 8 in this table, can they be excluded from the report or do they still need to be there? Third, is order of the rows important?
If its not important to show completely empty columns then we could remove 10 columns from the table above and compress it down to:
A B C E F H I L M O P Q R U V W
1 x x x x
2 x x x x x x
3 x x x x
4 x x x
5 x x x
6 x x x
7 x x x
8 x x x
Then if row order isn't important you can compress it further by taking an optimum row arrangement (not necessarily shown here). The two tables below have further been compress to 11 and 10 columns:
A B C F H I M P Q R U
1 x x x x
2 x x x x x x
5 x x x
7 x x x
A E H I L M O P U W
3 x x x x
4 x x x
6 x x x
8 x x x
Am I going down a completely wrong path here? These are all just questions to help me better understand your data and output requirements.
Also, in all seriousness, is it an option to get larger printers/plotters? Also, is it an option to just generate a PDF and use Acrobat's print tile's option?
Last year I read an article at the Computational Biology PLoS journal (www.ploscompbiol.org), that seems related to your problem.
In short, it describes a new approach when we already have a set of proteins and tabular data about their one-to-one interaction and we want to to group them so that interaction inside a group and interaction between two groups is either maximized or (this is the innovative idea) minimized .
If we plot the start data table with black for high and white for low interaction it looks randomly gray. The result table, after the calculations and rearranging is done (so grouped items are placed near one another), looks more like orthogonal areas of black and white.
The article: Protein Interaction Networks—More Than Mere Modules,
where there are also references to other older techniques for grouping this kind of data.
I'm not sure how to express this problem, so my apologies if it's already been addressed.
I have business rules summarized as a table of outputs given two inputs. For each of five possible value on one axis, and each of five values on another axis, there is a single output. There are ten distinct possibilities in these 25 cells, so it's not the case that each input pair has a unique output.
I have encoded these rules in TSQL with nested CASE statements, but it's hard to debug and modify. In C# I might use an array literal. I'm wondering if there's an academic topic which relates to converting logical rules to matrices and vice versa.
As an example, one could translate this trivial matrix:
A B C
-- -- -- --
X 1 1 0
Y 0 1 0
...into rules like so:
if B OR (A and X) then 1 else 0
...or, in verbose SQL:
CASE WHEN FieldABC = 'B' THEN 1
WHEN FieldABX = 'A' AND FieldXY = 'X' THEN 1
ELSE 0
I'm looking for a good approach for larger matrices, especially one I can use in SQL (MS SQL 2K8, if it matters). Any suggestions? Is there a term for this type of translation, with which I should search?
Sounds like a lookup into a 5x5 grid of data. The inputs on axis and the output in each cell:
Y=1 Y=2 Y=3 Y=4 Y=5
x=1 A A D B A
x=2 B A A B B
x=3 C B B B B
x=4 C C C D D
x=5 C C C C C
You can store this in a table of x,y,outvalue triplets and then just do a look up on that table.
SELECT OUTVALUE FROM BUSINESS_RULES WHERE X = #X and Y = #Y;