The requirements:
100k lines
One of the columns is not text - its custom painted with wxDC*.
The items addition is coming from another thread using wxThreadEvent.
Up until now I used wxDataViewListCtrl, but it takes too long to AppendItem 100 thousand time.
wxListCtrl (in virtual mode) does not have the ability to use wxDC* - please correct me if I am wrong.
The only thing I can think of is using wxDataViewCtrl + wxDataViewModel. But I can't understand how to add items.
I looked at the samples (https://github.com/wxWidgets/wxWidgets/tree/WX_3_0_BRANCH/samples/dataview), too complex for me.
I cant understand them.
I looked at the wiki (https://wiki.wxwidgets.org/WxDataViewCtrl), also too complex for me.
Can somebody please provide a very simple example of a wxDataViewCtrl + wxDataViewModel with one string column and one wxDC* column.
Thanks in advance.
P.S.
Per #HajoKirchhoff's request in the comments, I am posting some code:
// This is called from Rust 100k times.
extern "C" void Add_line_to_data_view_list_control(unsigned int index,
const char* date,
const char* sha1) {
wxThreadEvent evt(wxEVT_THREAD, 44);
evt.SetPayload(ViewListLine{index, std::string(date), std::string(sha1)});
wxQueueEvent(g_this, evt.Clone());
}
void TreeWidget::Add_line_to_data_view_list_control(wxThreadEvent& event) {
ViewListLine view_list_line = event.GetPayload<ViewListLine>();
wxVector<wxVariant> item;
item.push_back(wxVariant(static_cast<int>(view_list_line.index)));
item.push_back(wxVariant(view_list_line.date));
item.push_back(wxVariant(view_list_line.sha1));
AppendItem(item);
}
Appending 100k items to a control will always be slow. That's because it requires moving 100k items from your storage to the controls storage. A much better way for this amount of data is to have a "virtual" list control or wxGrid. In both cases the data is not actually transferred to the control. Instead when painting occurs, a callback function will transfer only the data required to paint. So for a 100k list you will only have "activity" for the 20-30 lines that are visible.
With wxListCtrl see https://docs.wxwidgets.org/3.0/classwx_list_ctrl.html, specify the wxLC_VIRTUAL flag, call SetItemCount and then provide/override
OnGetItemText
OnGetItemImage
OnGetItemColumnImage
Downside: You can only draw items contained in a wxImageList, since the OnGetItemImage return indizes into the list. So you cannot draw arbitrary items using a wxDC. Since the human eye will be overwhelmed with 100k different images anyway, this is usually acceptable. You may have to provide 20/30 different images beforehand, but you'll have a fast, flexible list.
That said, it is possible to override the OnPaint function and use that wxDC to draw anything in the list. But that'll get difficult pretty soon.
So an alternative would be to use wxGrid, create a wxGridTableBase derived class that acts as a bridge between the grid and your actual 100k data and create wxGridCellRenderer derived classes to render the actual data onscreen. The wxGridCellRenderer class will get a wxDC. This will give you more flexibility but is also much more complex than using a virtual wxListCtrl.
The full example of doing what you want will inevitably be relatively complex. But if you decompose in simple parts, it's really not that difficult: you do need to define a custom model, but if your list is flat, this basically just means returning the value of the item at the N-th position, as you can trivially implement all model methods related to the tree structure. An example of such a model, although with multiple columns can be found in the sample, so you just need to simplify it to a one (or two) column version.
Next, you are going to need a custom renderer too, but this is not difficult neither and, again, there is an example of this in the sample too.
If you have any concrete questions, you should ask them, but it's going to be difficult to do much better than what the sample shows and it does already show exactly what you want to do.
Thank you every one who replied!
#Vz.'s words "If you have any concrete questions, you should ask them" got me thinking and I took another look at the samples of wxWidgets. The full code can be found here. Look at the following classes:
TreeDataViewModel
TreeWidget
TreeCustomRenderer
I am building a work-logging app which starts by showing a list of projects that I can select, and then when one is selected you get a collection of other buttons, to log data related to that selected project.
I decided to have a selected_project : Maybe Int in my model (projects are keyed off an integer id), which gets filled with Just 2 if you select project 2, for example.
The buttons that appear when a project is selected send messages like AddMinutes 10 (i.e. log 10 minutes of work to the selected project).
Obviously the update function will receive one of these types of messages only if a project has been selected but I still have to keep checking that selected_project is a Just p.
Is there any way to avoid this?
One idea I had was to have the buttons send a message which contains the project id, such as AddMinutes 2 10 (i.e. log 10 minutes of work to project 2). To some extent this works, but I now get a duplication -- the Just 2 in the model.selected_project and the AddMinutes 2 ... message that the button emits.
Update
As Simon notes, the repeated check that model.selected_project is a Just p has its upside: the model stays relatively more decoupled from the UI. For example, there might be other UI ways to update the projects and you might not need to have first selected a project.
To avoid having to check the Maybe each time you need a function which puts you into a context wherein the value "wrapped" by the Maybe is available. That function is Maybe.map.
In your case, to handle the AddMinutes Int message you can simply call: Maybe.map (functionWhichAddsMinutes minutes) model.selected_project.
Clearly, there's a little bit more to it since you have to produce a model, but the point is you can use Maybe.map to perform an operation if the value is available in the Maybe. And to handle the Maybe.Nothing case, you can use Maybe.withDefault.
At the end of the day is this any better than using a case expression? Maybe, maybe not (pun intended).
Personally, I have used the technique of providing the ID along with the message and I was satisfied with the result.
I'm developing a project what similarly with the example "meetingscheduling", when I have a MeetingAssignment, I want to get its "previous MeetingAssignment" in the same room.
In other words, when I have a MeetingAssignment - TA1, I want to find the MeetingAssignment which is in the same room with TA1, and it should be nearest one on the left of TA1.
My idea is: When I get TA1 :
1. Get all the MeetingAssignments that have the same room with TA1.
2. Get the MeetingAssignments from the list generate by previous step what have
the less startingTimeGrain than TA1.
3. Find the MeetingAssignment what have the largest startingTimeGrain value.
it's the "previous MeetingAssignment".
But when I get the MeetingAssignment list of the sulotion class during planning(WorkingSolution), all of the room is null, I got the wrong solution?
Any better idea for it? Many thanks.
At the end of the Construction Heuristic (if it has a chance to complete, see DEBUG logging), all planning variables will be non-null. If the CH takes too, see the "scaling CH" chapter in the docs.
I have created a game, (4 in a row), in prolog. My heuristic function requires me to know how many Player's and Opponent's chips are in each possible 4-row combination on the board. The method I am using is as follows (in psuedocodish):
I have 1 list of all possible fours of the board (ComboList) =of the form==> [[A,B,C,D]|Rest].
I have 1 list of all the moves of the 1st player (List1) =of the form==> [[1],[7],[14]]
And 1 for opponent's moves (List2).
Step 1: obtain the first combo from ComboList, 2:
Check all of List1 to see how many are in this combo, 3:
Check all of List2 to see how many are in this combo,
Move onto the next combo from ComboList and start over...
This PROCESS takes waay too much runtime for what is required.
Please can someone suggest something better and more efficient! Much thanks in advance!
The following code uses member/3, which has also to become
known as nth1/3. See here:
http://storage.developerzen.com/fourrow.pro.txt
The predicate is nowadays found in library(lists) and has
possibly native support or a fast implementation:
http://www.swi-prolog.org/pldoc/man?predicate=nth1/3
But I guess asserting some facts and relying on argument
indexing might get you an even better result. See for
example here:
http://www.mxro.de/applications/four-in-a-row
Hope this helps.
Bye
I'm teaching/helping a student to program.
I remember the following process always helped me when I started; It looks pretty intuitive and I wonder if someone else have had a similar approach.
Read the problem and understand it ( of course ) .
Identify possible "functions" and variables.
Write how would I do it step by step ( algorithm )
Translate it into code, if there is something you cannot do, create a function that does it for you and keep moving.
With the time and practice I seem to have forgotten how hard it was to pass from problem description to a coding solution, but, by applying this method I managed to learn how to program.
So for a project description like:
A system has to calculate the price of an Item based on the following rules ( a description of the rules... client, discounts, availability etc.. etc.etc. )
I first step is to understand what the problem is.
Then identify the item, the rules the variables etc.
pseudo code something like:
function getPrice( itemPrice, quantity , clientAge, hourOfDay ) : int
if( hourOfDay > 18 ) then
discount = 5%
if( quantity > 10 ) then
discount = 5%
if( clientAge > 60 or < 18 ) then
discount = 5%
return item_price - discounts...
end
And then pass it to the programming language..
public class Problem1{
public int getPrice( int itemPrice, int quantity,hourOdDay ) {
int discount = 0;
if( hourOfDay > 10 ) {
// uh uh.. U don't know how to calculate percentage...
// create a function and move on.
discount += percentOf( 5, itemPriece );
.
.
.
you get the idea..
}
}
public int percentOf( int percent, int i ) {
// ....
}
}
Did you went on a similar approach?.. Did some one teach you a similar approach or did you discovered your self ( as I did :( )
I go via the test-driven approach.
1. I write down (on paper or plain text editor) a list of tests or specification that would satisfy the needs of the problem.
- simple calculations (no discounts and concessions) with:
- single item
- two items
- maximum number of items that doesn't have a discount
- calculate for discounts based on number of items
- buying 10 items gives you a 5% discount
- buying 15 items gives you a 7% discount
- etc.
- calculate based on hourly rates
- calculate morning rates
- calculate afternoon rates
- calculate evening rates
- calculate midnight rates
- calculate based on buyer's age
- children
- adults
- seniors
- calculate based on combinations
- buying 10 items in the afternoon
2. Look for the items that I think would be the easiest to implement and write a test for it. E.g single items looks easy
The sample using Nunit and C#.
[Test] public void SingleItems()
{
Assert.AreEqual(5, GetPrice(5, 1));
}
Implement that using:
public decimal GetPrice(decimal amount, int quantity)
{
return amount * quantity; // easy!
}
Then move on to the two items.
[Test]
public void TwoItemsItems()
{
Assert.AreEqual(10, GetPrice(5, 2));
}
The implementation still passes the test so move on to the next test.
3. Be always on the lookout for duplication and remove it. You are done when all the tests pass and you can no longer think of any test.
This doesn't guarantee that you will create the most efficient algorithm, but as long as you know what to test for and it all passes, it will guarantee that you are getting the right answers.
the old-school OO way:
write down a description of the problem and its solution
circle the nouns, these are candidate objects
draw boxes around the verbs, these are candidate messages
group the verbs with the nouns that would 'do' the action; list any other nouns that would be required to help
see if you can restate the solution using the form noun.verb(other nouns)
code it
[this method preceeds CRC cards, but its been so long (over 20 years) that I don't remember where i learned it]
when learning programming I don't think TDD is helpful. TDD is good later on when you have some concept of what programming is about, but for starters, having an environment where you write code and see the results in the quickest possible turn around time is the most important thing.
I'd go from problem statement to code instantly. Hack it around. Help the student see different ways of composing software / structuring algorithms. Teach the student to change their minds and rework the code. Try and teach a little bit about code aesthetics.
Once they can hack around code.... then introduce the idea of formal restructuring in terms of refactoring. Then introduce the idea of TDD as a way to make the process a bit more robust. But only once they are feeling comfortable in manipulating code to do what they want. Being able to specify tests is then somewhat easier at that stage. The reason is that TDD is about Design. When learning you don't really care so much about design but about what you can do, what toys do you have to play with, how do they work, how do you combine them together. Once you have a sense of that, then you want to think about design and thats when TDD really kicks in.
From there I'd start introducing micro patterns leading into design patterns
I did something similar.
Figure out the rules/logic.
Figure out the math.
Then try and code it.
After doing that for a couple of months it just gets internalized. You don't realize your doing it until you come up against a complex problem that requires you to break it down.
I start at the top and work my way down. Basically, I'll start by writing a high level procedure, sketch out the details inside of it, and then start filling in the details.
Say I had this problem (yoinked from project euler)
The sum of the squares of the first
ten natural numbers is, 1^2 + 2^2 +
... + 10^2 = 385
The square of the sum of the first ten
natural numbers is, (1 + 2 + ... +
10)^2 = 55^2 = 3025
Hence the difference between the sum
of the squares of the first ten
natural numbers and the square of the
sum is 3025 385 = 2640.
Find the difference between the sum of
the squares of the first one hundred
natural numbers and the square of the
sum.
So I start like this:
(display (- (sum-of-squares (list-to 10))
(square-of-sums (list-to 10))))
Now, in Scheme, there is no sum-of-squares, square-of-sums or list-to functions. So the next step would be to build each of those. In building each of those functions, I may find I need to abstract out more. I try to keep things simple so that each function only really does one thing. When I build some piece of functionality that is testable, I write a unit test for it. When I start noticing a logical grouping for some data, and the functions that act on them, I may push it into an object.
I've enjoyed TDD every since it was introduced to me. Helps me plan out my code, and it just puts me at ease having all my tests return with "success" every time I modify my code, letting me know I'm going home on time today!
Wishful thinking is probably the most important tool to solve complex problems. When in doubt, assume that a function exists to solve your problem (create a stub, at first). You'll come back to it later to expand it.
A good book for beginners looking for a process: Test Driven Development: By Example
My dad had a bunch of flow chart stencils that he used to make me use when he was first teaching me about programming. to this day I draw squares and diamonds to build out a logical process of how to analyze a problem.
I think there are about a dozen different heuristics I know of when it comes to programming and so I tend to go through the list at times with what I'm trying to do. At the start, it is important to know what is the desired end result and then try to work backwards to find it.
I remember an Algorithms class covering some of these ways like:
Reduce it to a known problem or trivial problem
Divide and conquer (MergeSort being a classic example here)
Use Data Structures that have the right functions (HeapSort being an example here)
Recursion (Knowing trivial solutions and being able to reduce to those)
Dynamic programming
Organizing a solution as well as testing it for odd situations, e.g. if someone thinks L should be a number, are what I'd usually use to test out the idea in pseudo code before writing it up.
Design patterns can be a handy set of tools to use for specific cases like where an Adapter is needed or organizing things into a state or strategy solution.
Yes.. well TDD did't existed ( or was not that popular ) when I began. Would be TDD the way to go to pass from problem description to code?... Is not that a little bit advanced? I mean, when a "future" developer hardly understand what a programming language is, wouldn't it be counterproductive?
What about hamcrest the make the transition from algorithm to code.
I think there's a better way to state your problem.
Instead of defining it as 'a system,' define what is expected in terms of user inputs and outputs.
"On a window, a user should select an item from a list, and a box should show him how much it costs."
Then, you can give him some of the factors determining the costs, including sample items and what their costs should end up being.
(this is also very much a TDD-like idea)
Keep in mind, if you get 5% off then another 5% off, you don't get 10% off. Rather, you pay 95% of 95%, which is 90.25%, or 9.75% off. So, you shouldn't add the percentage.