Searching for an answer I found ambiguous multi_select filter - AND and OR condition - javascript and looked in the code. I don't see any way to have the multi_select support AND (intersection) and OR (union, the default).
Consider the Tags column in http://yadcf-showcase.appspot.com/DOM_source_select2.html. I would like to see a checkbox, or better a toggle button (not sure the best text, maybe AND and OR as defaults, but even better if the text is configurable) to set behavior.
In this case, assume Tags is multi_select and set to Tag1, Tag2. AND function would show only first two rows. OR function (default) would show all rows except 7 and 10.
I'm not sure this could be achieved with multi_select_custom_func as I'm not sure how to implement the toggle button.
Right now you can use only one AND / OR but not both (with the help of multi_select_custom_func) , but you can open an enhancement request asking for adding checkbox (with configurable label) which will allow you to implement different logic when checked / unchecked inside your multi_select_custom_func implementation
Related
So this is a bit of a performance question regarding Selenium Webdriver (Chromedriver) and Capybara.
I have some react-select dropdowns with quite a bit of data in them. For some reason the react-selects take a VERY VERY long time to pick out the option in them. The code is pretty simple and I grabbed it from here: https://github.com/JedWatson/react-select/issues/832
But it basically comes down to:
page.find('.Select-control').click
page.find('.Select-option', text: 'the text').click
Thing is, this works fine. But it takes an extremely long time (Upwards of a minute a dropdown). Now...in Capybaras defense these dropdowns have a LOT of options to select from, so I thought selecting from the top-most item would be the fastest, but that doesn't seem to affect it.
Does Capybara/Selenium hold the "options" in a different sorted list somewhere or something? Since i'd assume selecting from a top option in the dropdown would be faster, but it doesn't seem to be?
Generally, when using the text option, find first finds all the elements that match using the locator with the current selector type. In your case your selector type is defaulting to :css, and the locator is .Select-option. So Capybara will find all elements with the class Select-option and then it will go through each of those elements comparing the text to see what matches (and checking visibility), but it will have to compare all of them to make sure the selector isn't ambiguous.
One way to speed that up would be to use first with a minimum option
page.first('.Select-option', text: 'the text', minimum: 1).click
which can skip some of the text and visibility checking since it doesn't have to worry about ambiguous elements. Another solution would be to skip the text option altogether and write it into an XPath along the lines of
page.find(:xpath, XPath.css('.Select-option')[XPath.string.n.is('the text')]).click # Haven't verified this is 100% correct but it should be close
If you're doing this a lot in your app you may want to consider creating a custom selector for this
Capybara.add_selector(:react_option) do
xpath do |locator|
XPath.css('.Select-option')[XPath.string.n.is(locator)]
end
# You can add other filters in here - see https://github.com/teamcapybara/capybara/blob/master/lib/capybara/selector.rb
end
which would then allow you to do
page.find(:react_option, 'the text').click
Note, if you can limit the element types it will also make the query more efficient, so if all of the elements are <li> elements you might want to do something like
XPath.css('li.Select-option')[XPath.string.n.is(locator)]
I am wondering, is there an official way to specify a different widget editor for the same column in a DataGrid (different rows)?
I found dojox.grid.cells._MultipleEditor, but it is quite complicated and not officially supported.
This is for creating things like a property sheet with DataGrid.
EDIT: People seem to suggest using dgrid. However, I am not sure if dgrid has this feature. Also, unfortunately, ... drum roll... horror music... I must support IE6.
Well, there seems to be a way to do it. Doesn't seem to show much negative side effects (so far)...
Create one column for each value type, one after the other.
Tag each column with a CSS class to indicate its value type (via classes). For example: classes="multivalue int"
For each column, tag it with the correct editor widget and the appropriate constraint & options.
Put styles on each row (with onStyleRow) that correspond to each type. For example, add a type-int class to the row that has an int type.
Put in a CSS style that initially hides all the multi-valued cells:
.dojoxGridCell.multivalue { display:none; }
Un-hide all the cells with the correct type:
.dojoxGridRow.type-int .dojoxGridCell.multivalue.int
{
display:table-cell;
*display:block; /* For IE6/7 */
}
For this to work, obviously, each row must match exactly one column.
Obviously, you must set all these fields to the same property name. DataGrid allows you to do that.
Put display:none (via CSS etc.) on all the header cells of multi-valued columns except the first one. Otherwise, you'll end up with too many header cells.
for items of a certain template, our users can indicate that the item should be shown on top of the list.
For this, we have added a field in the index "ShowOnTop".
Now when searching for items of this template (to build the list page), we would like to have these "ShowOnTop" items to effectively be returned on top of the other items.
This field however should not affect other site search (general search).
We think this could be possible by applying Query-Time Boosting to these documents. But, how can we achieve this?
To do boosting at query-time simply use Boost(value) method (using a search predicate as it sounds like you might be doing some advanced searching where added flexibility of predicates might come in handy) -
var queryPredicate = PredicateBuilder.True<SearchResult>();
queryPredicate = queryPredicate.And(i =>
i.Headline.Contains(model.Query).Boost(50));
Probably the best way would be to apply a Sort based on that field, something along the lines of:
Sort sort = new Sort(new SortField("ShowOnTop", SortField.STRING, true), true);
var hits = new SearchHits(context.Searcher.Search(query, sort));
You could also add it as a heavily boosted optional query term, something along the lines of, and make the rest of the query is required (as a whole), like:
ShowOnTop:true^10000 +(the rest of the query)
With a large enough boost factor, those terms should always come up first unless there is a really drastic difference in relevance.
Easiest is creating a rule under /sitecore/system/Settings/Rules/Indexing and Search/... that filters on your ShowOnTop field (I used a checkbox and compared the value with 1) and adjust the boost by 99999999
You can either add this rule as Global Rule or you can add it as Item rule and assign the rule from within the item.
Good luck!
This is really a "best practices" question: Assume I have a dynamically generated pull-down list populated with suggested values (e.g. [Vanilla, Strawberry, Chocolate]). How do I give the user the option of selecting one of the suggested values OR inputting a new value (e.g. "Rocky Road")?
One approach would be to populate the list with a None of the Above entry ([Vanilla, Strawberry, Chocolate, None of the Above]) and write my controller so that if None of the Above is selected, it will then render a form with a text field instead of the pull-down. But that feels horribly clunky.
Is there some elegant GUI technique for this sort of thing, perhaps using JQuery?
I suggest you to use simple text input with jquery autocomplate plugin don't use pull-down list. Autocomplate can work with datas you populated. If user inputs a new value, in controller use find_or_create_by dynamic activerecord method.
I'm trying to use IntelliJ 10.5's "structural search" feature to find classes that implement an interface, A but do not implement another interface, B.
By searching first for classes that implement A, and then limiting the search scope to 'previous search results,' it's easy to reduce this to just searching for classes that do not implement B, which is conceptually pretty simple. Unfortunately, I haven't yet managed to pull it off.
If I search for
class $clazz$ implements $B$ {}
and then tick 'invert condition' in the text constraints for variable B, it seems to find 'all classes that implement something other than B' even if they also implement B. I've also tried ticking 'invert condition' on the 'complete match' variable, and its effect is not immediately obvious, but definitely not what I'm looking for.
Inicidentaly, someone else asked a similar question on the IntelliJ forums, but got no love. Help me out, stackoverflow!
To find classes that implement InterfaceA, but don't implement InterfaceB, I did the following:
Search > Search Structurally
Click Copy existing template
Select implementors of an interface (within hierarcy) and click OK
Click Edit Variables
Select Interface in the Variables list
Enter InterfaceA in Text / regular expression and click OK
Click Find
Search > Search Structurally
Click Edit Variables
Select Interface in the Variables list
Enter InterfaceB in Text / regular expression, 0 in Minimum Count and 0 in Maximum Count and click OK
Select Previous Search Results in the Scope dropdown
Click Find
Note I had problems when I tried to use the Edit Query button at step 8. I didn't research/retry, but going back to the menu and selecting Search > Search Structurally definitely worked.