This is my model class:
class Contact {
String name;
String email;
int phoneNo;
Contact(this.name, this.email, this.phoneNo);
}
Suppose I have a list of contacts like below:
List<Contact> contacts = [
new Contact('John', 'john#c.com', 002100),
new Contact('Lily', 'lily#c.com', 083924),
new Contact('Abby', 'abby#c.com', 103385),
];
I want to get John's phone number from contacts List, how can I do that?
singleWhere throws if there are duplicates or no element that matches.
An alternative is firstWhere with orElse https://api.dartlang.org/stable/1.24.3/dart-core/Iterable/firstWhere.html
var urgentCont = contacts.firstWhere((e) => e.name == 'John', orElse: () => null);
print(urgentCont?.phoneNo?.toString()?.padLeft(6, '0') ?? '(not found)');//Output: 002100
This is how I do it using singleWhere:
var urgentCont = contacts.singleWhere((e) => e.name == 'John');
print(urgentCont.phoneNo.toString().padLeft(6, '0'));//Output: 002100
singleWhere(bool test(E element)) → E Returns the single element that
satisfies test.
And there is some other methods in List class. As a example where():
where(bool test(E element)) → Iterable<E> Returns a new lazy Iterable
with all elements that satisfy the predicate test.
Update:
singleWhere() throws an error when there is no matching elements(Bad state: No element). And if there are duplicates, will throw Bad state: Too many elements
So, the best one is firstWhere according to #GunterZochbauer(refer his answer)
Related
I have a SplayTreeSet of the objects ChatRoomListModel. I'd like to order my set based on the objects DateTime createTime value.
I'm not sure where I'm going wrong because there's duplicate items being added item.
I later down the line perform a _latestMessages.add(newMessage) and it's not actually calling the overloads and there's duplicates being added.
I tested by using _latestMessage.contains(newMessageButSameChatRoomId), it returns false.
When I perform _latestMessage.toSet() every duplicate goes away.
How can I get SplayTreeSet to use my overloading equals?
Thanks!
ObservableSet<ChatRoomListModel> _latestMessages = ObservableSet.splayTreeSetFrom(
ObservableSet(),
compare: (a, b) => b.compareTo(a),
);
The ChatRoomListModel model has the following methods and overloads:
int compareTo(ChatRoomListModel other){
return messagesModel.createTime.compareTo(other.messagesModel.createTime);
}
ChatRoomListModel copyWith({
String? firstName,
String? otherUserId,
MessagesModel? messagesModel,
}) {
return ChatRoomListModel(
firstName: firstName ?? this.firstName,
otherUserId: otherUserId ?? this.otherUserId,
messagesModel: messagesModel ?? this.messagesModel,
);
}
#override
bool operator ==(Object other) =>
identical(this, other) ||
other is ChatRoomListModel &&
runtimeType == other.runtimeType &&
messagesModel.chatRoomId == other.messagesModel.chatRoomId;
#override
int get hashCode => messagesModel.chatRoomId.hashCode;
Your issue is that you have two completely different notions of what it means for two ChatRoomListModel objects to be "equal". You provide both compareTo and operator == implementations, but they consider different sets of properties, so compareTo can return 0 when operator == returns false, which is confusing at best. SplayTreeMap considers only compareTo, not operator ==. From the SplayTreeSet documentation:
Elements of the set are compared using the compare function passed in the constructor, both for ordering and for equality. If the set contains only an object a, then set.contains(b) will return true if and only if compare(a, b) == 0, and the value of a == b is not even checked.
I'm presuming what you call "duplicates" are elements that have equal chatRoomIds but that have different creation times, and creation times are the only things that your SplayTreeSet cares about.
If your goal is to maintain only the latest message per chatRoomId, you need to maintain a data structure that uses the chatRoomId (a String) as a key. The natural collection for that would be a Map<String, ChatRoomListModel>. (Since the ChatRoomListModel knows its own chatRoomId, it also could just be a HashSet with explicit equals and hashCode callbacks.)
If you additionally want to keep messages in chronological order, you either will need to explicitly sort them afterward or maintain a separate data structure that keeps them in chronological order. You could continue using a SplayTreeSet for that. Basically before you add any entry to the SplayTreeSet, check the Map first to see if an existing entry for that chatRoomId.
I don't fully understand your data structures, but here's an example that you presumably can adapt:
import 'dart:collection';
class Message {
Message(this.creationTime, {required this.chatRoomId, required this.text});
final DateTime creationTime;
final String chatRoomId;
final String text;
#override
String toString() => '$creationTime: [$chatRoomId] $text';
}
class Messages {
final _latestMessages = <String, Message>{};
final _orderedMessages = SplayTreeSet<Message>((message1, message2) {
var result = message1.creationTime.compareTo(message2.creationTime);
if (result != 0) {
return result;
}
result = message1.chatRoomId.compareTo(message2.chatRoomId);
if (result != 0) {
return result;
}
return message1.text.compareTo(message2.text);
});
void add(Message message) {
var existingMessage = _latestMessages[message.chatRoomId];
if (existingMessage != null &&
message.creationTime.compareTo(existingMessage.creationTime) < 0) {
// An existing message exists with a later creation date. Ignore the
// incoming message.
return;
}
_latestMessages[message.chatRoomId] = message;
_orderedMessages.remove(existingMessage);
_orderedMessages.add(message);
}
void printAll() => _orderedMessages.forEach(print);
}
void main() {
var messages = Messages();
messages.add(Message(
DateTime(2023, 1, 1),
chatRoomId: 'foo',
text: 'Hello foo!',
));
messages.add(Message(
DateTime(2023, 1, 2),
chatRoomId: 'bar',
text: 'Goodbye bar!',
));
messages.add(Message(
DateTime(2023, 1, 2),
chatRoomId: 'foo',
text: 'Goodbye foo!',
));
messages.add(Message(
DateTime(2023, 1, 1),
chatRoomId: 'bar',
text: 'Hello bar!',
));
messages.printAll();
}
Hello I am new to dart and trying to find an item by property name in a list of list.
class Product{
String id;
String title;
Product(this.id,this.title);
}
void main(){
List<List<Product>> allProdcuts=[
//New Prodcuts
[
Product("1","Hammer"),
Product("3","Nails"),
Product("2","Screws"),
],
futureItems,
//Old Prodcuts
[
Product("4","Rock"),
Product("5","Paper"),
Product("6","Scissor"),
],
//Rare Items
[
Product("7","Plank"),
Product("8","Wires"),
Product("9","Box"),
],
];
print(allProdcuts.where((itemsList)=>itemsList.contains((product)=>product.title='Wires')));
//Returns ()
}
I have tried using for a single List:
List<Product> futureItems= [
Product("101","Galactic Hammer"),
Product("301","Galactic Nails"),
Product("201","Galactic Screws"),
];
print(newProduct.firstWhere((p)=>p.title=='Hammer'));
//Instance of 'Product'
Also tried this:
print(allProdcuts.map((itemList)=>itemList.firstWhere((p)=>p.title=='Nails')));
// Bad state: No elementError: Bad state: No element.
But there is an element with the title='Nails'.I don't understand what I am doing wrong.
You are calling itemList.firstWhere((p)=>p.title=='Nails') on each list, also the ones with no element with title "Nails". Since firstWhere throws if there is no matching value, it does that for two of your three lists. Also, in the example, itemsList.contains(...) does not take a callback, so you are just checking whether a function is in the list, which it isn't. You might want to use any for that, but it won't solve the problem here.
To do this efficiently, I'd probably create helper function:
Product findByTitle(List<List<Product>> allProducts, String title) {
for (var products in allProducts) {
for (var product in products) {
if (product.title == title) return product;
}
}
// Or return `null`.
throw ArgumentError.value(title, "title", "No element with that title");
}
The return in the middle allows you to skip out of the double iteration the moment you have a match, something which is harder to do with firstWhere/map/forEach etc.
One alternative solutions would be:
var product = allProducts.expand((l) => l.where((p) => p.title == title)).first;
which finds all the products with the given title and flattens them into a single iterable, then picks the first one (if there are any). Because iterables are lazy, it will actually stop at the first match.
There are many ways to solve this.
One example is to use the forEach() method:
allProdcuts.forEach(
(List<Product> l)=>l.forEach(
(Product p){
if (p.title=="Nails")
print(p.id);
}
)
);
The for each method receives a function and applies this function to every element on the list. If you have a lists of lists, you can do this twice to get a function applied to each element of the sub lists.
The above code prints 3, which is the desired result.
Another solution would be to flatten the list first, so you can have an easier search later.
print(allProdcuts.any((innerListOfProducts) =>
innerListOfProducts.any((product) => product.title == 'Wires')));
This code will return true if 'Wires' is in the inner list, and false otherwise.
From the docs:
You can also chain multiple where() methods to create more specific queries (logical AND).
How can I perform an OR query?
Example:
Give me all documents where the field status is open OR upcoming
Give me all documents where the field status == open OR createdAt <= <somedatetime>
OR isn't supported as it's hard for the server to scale it (requires keeping state to dedup). The work around is to issue 2 queries, one for each condition, and dedup on the client.
Edit (Nov 2019):
Cloud Firestore now supports IN queries which are a limited type of OR query.
For the example above you could do:
// Get all documents in 'foo' where status is open or upcmoming
db.collection('foo').where('status','in',['open','upcoming']).get()
However it's still not possible to do a general OR condition involving multiple fields.
With the recent addition of IN queries, Firestore supports "up to 10 equality clauses on the same field with a logical OR"
A possible solution to (1) would be:
documents.where('status', 'in', ['open', 'upcoming']);
See Firebase Guides: Query Operators | in and array-contains-any
suggest to give value for status as well.
ex.
{ name: "a", statusValue = 10, status = 'open' }
{ name: "b", statusValue = 20, status = 'upcoming'}
{ name: "c", statusValue = 30, status = 'close'}
you can query by ref.where('statusValue', '<=', 20) then both 'a' and 'b' will found.
this can save your query cost and performance.
btw, it is not fix all case.
I would have no "status" field, but status related fields, updating them to true or false based on request, like
{ name: "a", status_open: true, status_upcoming: false, status_closed: false}
However, check Firebase Cloud Functions. You could have a function listening status changes, updating status related properties like
{ name: "a", status: "open", status_open: true, status_upcoming: false, status_closed: false}
one or the other, your query could be just
...where('status_open','==',true)...
Hope it helps.
This doesn't solve all cases, but for "enum" fields, you can emulate an "OR" query by making a separate boolean field for each enum-value, then adding a where("enum_<value>", "==", false) for every value that isn't part of the "OR" clause you want.
For example, consider your first desired query:
Give me all documents where the field status is open OR upcoming
You can accomplish this by splitting the status: string field into multiple boolean fields, one for each enum-value:
status_open: bool
status_upcoming: bool
status_suspended: bool
status_closed: bool
To perform your "where status is open or upcoming" query, you then do this:
where("status_suspended", "==", false).where("status_closed", "==", false)
How does this work? Well, because it's an enum, you know one of the values must have true assigned. So if you can determine that all of the other values don't match for a given entry, then by deduction it must match one of the values you originally were looking for.
See also
in/not-in/array-contains-in: https://firebase.google.com/docs/firestore/query-data/queries#in_and_array-contains-any
!=: https://firebase.googleblog.com/2020/09/cloud-firestore-not-equal-queries.html
I don't like everyone saying it's not possible.
it is if you create another "hacky" field in the model to build a composite...
for instance, create an array for each document that has all logical or elements
then query for .where("field", arrayContains: [...]
you can bind two Observables using the rxjs merge operator.
Here you have an example.
import { Observable } from 'rxjs/Observable';
import 'rxjs/add/observable/merge';
...
getCombinatedStatus(): Observable<any> {
return Observable.merge(this.db.collection('foo', ref => ref.where('status','==','open')).valueChanges(),
this.db.collection('foo', ref => ref.where('status','==','upcoming')).valueChanges());
}
Then you can subscribe to the new Observable updates using the above method:
getCombinatedStatus.subscribe(results => console.log(results);
I hope this can help you, greetings from Chile!!
We have the same problem just now, luckily the only possible values for ours are A,B,C,D (4) so we have to query for things like A||B, A||C, A||B||C, D, etc
As of like a few months ago firebase supports a new query array-contains so what we do is make an array and we pre-process the OR values to the array
if (a) {
array addObject:#"a"
}
if (b) {
array addObject:#"b"
}
if (a||b) {
array addObject:#"a||b"
}
etc
And we do this for all 4! values or however many combos there are.
THEN we can simply check the query [document arrayContains:#"a||c"] or whatever type of condition we need.
So if something only qualified for conditional A of our 4 conditionals (A,B,C,D) then its array would contain the following literal strings: #["A", "A||B", "A||C", "A||D", "A||B||C", "A||B||D", "A||C||D", "A||B||C||D"]
Then for any of those OR combinations we can just search array-contains on whatever we may want (e.g. "A||C")
Note: This is only a reasonable approach if you have a few number of possible values to compare OR with.
More info on Array-contains here, since it's newish to firebase docs
If you have a limited number of fields, definitely create new fields with true and false like in the example above. However, if you don't know what the fields are until runtime, you have to just combine queries.
Here is a tags OR example...
// the ids of students in class
const students = [studentID1, studentID2,...];
// get all docs where student.studentID1 = true
const results = this.afs.collection('classes',
ref => ref.where(`students.${students[0]}`, '==', true)
).valueChanges({ idField: 'id' }).pipe(
switchMap((r: any) => {
// get all docs where student.studentID2...studentIDX = true
const docs = students.slice(1).map(
(student: any) => this.afs.collection('classes',
ref => ref.where(`students.${student}`, '==', true)
).valueChanges({ idField: 'id' })
);
return combineLatest(docs).pipe(
// combine results by reducing array
map((a: any[]) => {
const g: [] = a.reduce(
(acc: any[], cur: any) => acc.concat(cur)
).concat(r);
// filter out duplicates by 'id' field
return g.filter(
(b: any, n: number, a: any[]) => a.findIndex(
(v: any) => v.id === b.id) === n
);
}),
);
})
);
Unfortunately there is no other way to combine more than 10 items (use array-contains-any if < 10 items).
There is also no other way to avoid duplicate reads, as you don't know the ID fields that will be matched by the search. Luckily, Firebase has good caching.
For those of you that like promises...
const p = await results.pipe(take(1)).toPromise();
For more info on this, see this article I wrote.
J
OR isn't supported
But if you need that you can do It in your code
Ex : if i want query products where (Size Equal Xl OR XXL : AND Gender is Male)
productsCollectionRef
//1* first get query where can firestore handle it
.whereEqualTo("gender", "Male")
.addSnapshotListener((queryDocumentSnapshots, e) -> {
if (queryDocumentSnapshots == null)
return;
List<Product> productList = new ArrayList<>();
for (DocumentSnapshot snapshot : queryDocumentSnapshots.getDocuments()) {
Product product = snapshot.toObject(Product.class);
//2* then check your query OR Condition because firestore just support AND Condition
if (product.getSize().equals("XL") || product.getSize().equals("XXL"))
productList.add(product);
}
liveData.setValue(productList);
});
For Flutter dart language use this:
db.collection("projects").where("status", whereIn: ["public", "unlisted", "secret"]);
actually I found #Dan McGrath answer working here is a rewriting of his answer:
private void query() {
FirebaseFirestore db = FirebaseFirestore.getInstance();
db.collection("STATUS")
.whereIn("status", Arrays.asList("open", "upcoming")) // you can add up to 10 different values like : Arrays.asList("open", "upcoming", "Pending", "In Progress", ...)
.addSnapshotListener(new EventListener<QuerySnapshot>() {
#Override
public void onEvent(#Nullable QuerySnapshot queryDocumentSnapshots, #Nullable FirebaseFirestoreException e) {
for (DocumentSnapshot documentSnapshot : queryDocumentSnapshots) {
// I assume you have a model class called MyStatus
MyStatus status= documentSnapshot.toObject(MyStatus.class);
if (status!= null) {
//do somthing...!
}
}
}
});
}
I would like to obtain an object from a List based on a specific search criteria of its member variable
this is the code I am using
class foo
{
foo(this._a);
int _a;
}
List<foo> lst = new List<foo>();
main()
{
foo f = new foo(12);
lst.add(f);
List<foo> result = lst.where( (foo m) {
return m._a == 12;
});
print(result[0]._a);
}
I am getting the error and not sure how to resolve this
Uncaught exception:
TypeError: Instance of 'WhereIterable<foo>': type 'WhereIterable<foo>' is not a subtype of type 'List<foo>'
I am trying to search for an object whose member variable a == 12. Any suggestions on what I might be doing wrong ?
The Iterable.where method returns an iterable of all the members which satisfy your test, not just one, and it's a lazily computed iterable, not a list. You can use lst.where(test).toList() to create a list, but that's overkill if you only need the first element.
You can use lst.firstWhere(test) instead to only return the first element, or you can use lst.where(test).first to do effectively the same thing.
In either case, the code will throw if there is no element matched by the test.
To avoid throwing, you can use var result = lst.firstWhere(test, orElse: () => null) so you get null if there is no such element.
Another alternative is
foo result;
int index = lst.indexWhere(test);
if (index >= 0) result = lst[index];
The answer is simple. Iterable.where returns an Iterable, not a List. AFAIK this is because _WhereIterable does its computations lazily.
If you really need to return a List, call lst.where(...).toList().
Otherwise, you can set result to be an Iterable<foo>, instead of a List<foo>.
or you can go crazy and do this:
bool checkIfProductNotFound(Map<String, Object> trendingProduct) {
bool isNotFound = this
._MyProductList
.where((element) => element["id"] == trendingProduct["id"])
.toList()
.isEmpty;
return isNotFound ;
}
I'm designing an interface where the user can join a publicaiton to a keyword, and when they do, I want to suggest other keywords that commonly occur in tandem with the selected keyword. The trick is getting the frequency of correlation alongside the properties of the suggested keywords.
The Keyword type (EF) has these fields:
int Id
string Text
string UrlString
...and a many-to-many relation to a Publications entity-set.
I'm almost there. With :
var overlappedKeywords =
selectedKeyword.Publications.SelectMany(p => p.Keywords).ToList();
Here I get something very useful: a flattened list of keywords, each duplicated in the list however many times it appears in tandem with selectedKeyword.
The remaining Challenge:
So I want to get a count of the number of times each keyword appears in this list, and project the distinct keyword entities onto a new type, called KeywordCounts, having the same fields as Keyword but with one extra field: int PublicationsCount, into which I will populate the count of each Keyword within overlappedKeywords. How can I do this??
So far I've tried 2 approaches:
var keywordCounts = overlappingKeywords
.Select(oc => new KeywordCount
{
KeywordId = oc.Id,
Text = oc.Text,
UrlString = oc.UrlString,
PublicationsCount = overlappingKeywords.Count(ok2 => ok2.Id == oc.Id)
})
.Distinct();
...PublicationsCount is getting populated correctly, but Distinct isn't working here. (must I create an EqualityComarer for this? Why doesn't the default EqualityComarer work?)
var keywordCounts = overlappingKeywords
.GroupBy(o => o.Id)
.Select(c => new KeywordCount
{
Id = ???
Text = ???
UrlString = ???
PublicationsCount = ???
})
I'm not very clear on GroupBy. I don't seem to have any access to 'o' in the Select, and c isn't comping up with any properties of Keyword
UPDATE
My first approach would work with a simple EqualityComparer passed into .Distinct() :
class KeywordEqualityComparer : IEqualityComparer<KeywordCount>
{
public bool Equals(KeywordCount k1, KeywordCount k2)
{
return k1.KeywordId== k2.KeywordId;
}
public int GetHashCode(KeywordCount k)
{
return k.KeywordId.GetHashCode();
}
}
...but Slauma's answer is preferable (and accepted) because it does not require this. I'm still stumped as to what the default EqualityComparer would be for an EF entity instance -- wouldn't it just compare based on primary ids, as I did above here?
You second try is the better approach. I think the complete code would be:
var keywordCounts = overlappingKeywords
.GroupBy(o => o.Id)
.Select(c => new KeywordCount
{
Id = c.Key,
Text = c.Select(x => x.Text).FirstOrDefault(),
UrlString = c.Select(x => x.UrlString).FirstOrDefault(),
PublicationsCount = c.Count()
})
.ToList();
This is LINQ to Objects, I guess, because there doesn't seem to be a EF context involved but an object overlappingKeywords, so the grouping happens in memory, not in the database.