I 'm trouble understanding in modifying the solution from GENERIC SEARCH
as my class is more complex and I need to create several different search functions
procedure TForm1.Button1Click(Sender: TObject);
var
activities: TList<TActivityCategory>;
search: TActivityCategory;
begin
activities := TObjectList<TActivityCategory>.Create(
TDelegatedComparer<TActivityCategory>.Create(
function(const Left, Right: TActivityCategory): Integer
begin
Result := CompareText(Left.Name, Right.Name);
end));
.....
Assume my TActivityCategory looks like
TActivityCategory = class
FirstName : String;
Secondname : String;
onemore .....
end;
How to implement a search for every String inside my activtity class ?
In your place I would write a subclass of TObjectList and add a custom Search method that would look like this:
TSearchableObjectList<T:class> = class(TObjectList<T>)
public
function Search(aFound: TPredicate<T>): T;
end;
The implementation for that method is
function TSearchableObjectList<T>.Search(aFound: TPredicate<T>): T;
var
item: T;
begin
for item in Self do
if aFound(item) then
Exit(item);
Result := nil;
end;
An example of this method is
var
myList: TSearchableObjectList<TActivitycategory>;
item: TActivitycategory;
searchKey: string;
begin
myList := TSearchableObjectList<TActivitycategory>.Create;
// Here you load your list
searchKey := 'WantedName';
// Let´s make it more interesting and perform a case insensitive search,
// by comparing with SameText() instead the equality operator
item := myList.Search(function(aItem : TActivitycategory): boolean begin
Result := SameText(aItem.FirstName, searchKey);
end);
// the rest of your code
end;
The TPredicate<T> type used above is declared in SysUtils, so be sure to add it to your uses clause.
I believe this is the closest we can get to lambda expressions in Delphi.
TList supports searching for items using either linear or binary search. With binary search, the algorithm assumes an ordering. That's not appropriate for your needs. Linear search seems to me to be what you need, and it's available through the Contains method.
The problem is that Contains assumes that you are searching for an entire instance of T. You want to pass a single string to Contains but it won't accept that. It wants a complete record, in your case.
You could provide a Comparer that only compares a single field. And then pass Contains a record with just that one field specified. But that's pretty ugly. Frankly the design of this class is very weak when it comes to searching and sorting. The fact that the comparer is a state variable rather than a parameter is a shocking lapse in my view.
The bottom line is that TList does not readily offer what you are looking for without resorting to ugliness. You should probably implement an old-fashion loop across the list to look for your match.
Note that I'm assuming you want to provide a single string and search for an entry that has a field matching the string. If in fact you do want to provide a complete record and match every field, then Contains does what you need, with suitable Comparer using a lexicographic ordering.
Related
Basically, I have an application which will retrieve information out of an INI file and part of this process includes extracting the names -stored in the INI- of some procedures declared at global scope inside another unit.
I use the following to get the SQL method:
MyIni.ReadString('SQL', SubStr + '_Insert, '');
SubStr is the type of data I want, for example "titles", this is prefixed with the type of SQL procedure I want, in this case "_Insert" therefore, my request here could be seen as:
MyIni.ReadString('SQL', 'titles_Insert', '');
This would then retrieve the appropriate SQL procedure name "InsertTitlesSql" which is displayed inside the INI thus:
[SQL]
titles_Insert=InsertTitlesSql
I have a unit which lists the SQL procedures we use.
Like so:
unit uSqlLibrary;
interface
function InsertTitlesSql: string;
implementation
function InsertTitlesSql: string;
begin
{
INSERT INTO TITLES (ENGLISH, AFRIKAANS, KEY)
VALUES (:english,
:afrikaans,
:key)
}
Result := ''
+'INSERT INTO TITLES (ENGLISH, AFRIKAANS, KEY) '
+'VALUES (:english, '
+' :afrikaans, '
+' :key) ';
end;
end.
I've tried TGenericContainer without any success, I've also tried MethodAddress but I don't know how to tell MethodAddress to look at the other unit without an Object to reference (Form1.MethodAddress() for example) my best result so far is this:
type
TExec = procedure of object;
procedure TForm1.Button1Click(Sender: TObject);
var
M : TMethod ;
E : TExec ;
begin
M.Code := #Test; // Where "Test" is a procedure inside a secondary Unit.
E := TExec(M);
E;
end;
What I'm trying to do is get the SQL procedure by name that I want ( function InsertTitlesSql : string;) and assign it to a generic method that behaves in the same way.
My team lead has said that he doesn't want to edit the uSqlLibrary; so I can't do it that way and have thought to go by the method's name instead. Any other suggestions are welcome.
Hope this is clear. Sorry if it's not ( my use of terminology is not so good xD ). I'll try to elaborate on your queries to the best of my knowledge if I can.
You cannot use RTTI to enumerate procedures with global scope. You can enumerate methods, so you could convert your global procedures to be static class methods.
However, you also state that your team lead does not want you to change uSqlLibrary. This seems a little short sighted in my opinion. Feel free to tell him/her that I said so.
Anyway, if you cannot change uSqlLibrary then you cannot use RTTI. So you'll need to construct your own lookup table. Use a generic dictionary:
uses
System.Generics.Collections;
var
ProcTable: TDictionary<string, TProc>;
Instantiate it in the usual way. Add your functions at program startup:
....
ProcTable.Add('InsertTitlesSql', InsertTitlesSql);
....
When you need to look one up and call it do this:
var
Proc: TProc;
....
if not ProcTable.TryGetValue(ProcName, Proc) then
raise EProcNotFound.CreateFmt(...);
Proc();
The default equality comparer used for the key is case-sensitive by default. So you may elect to supply a custom equality comparer that compares keys without case sensitivity.
I'm attempting to assign all the selected items in a TxpListBox to a TStringList.
My initial thought was to do something like
Function AssignListBoxToList(ComponentName : TxpListBox) : Boolean;
var
slComponentValue : TStringList;
begin
slComponentValue := TStringList.Create;
slComponentValue.Add(ComponentName.Items);
end;
But it throws the following exception Incompatible types: 'String' and 'TString'.
Is there a way to either create a TStringList of TStrings, or is it safe to use String instead of TString in my TxpListBox, and/or am I missing something.
TxpListBox is a TListBox with a modified look to fit in with the Windows XP design aesthetic.
It looks like TxpComboBox.Items might be a TStrings descendent (like the standard TComboBox.Items). If that's the case, something like this should work:
slComponentValue := TStringList.Create;
slComponentValue.Add(ComponentName.Items[ComponentName.ItemIndex]);
Your function won't work as is, though, because it doesn't return slComponentValue.
It's generally not a good idea (without a specific reason to do so) to return an object from a function, because it's not clear where the responsibility lies to free it. I prefer to make that more clear by having a procedure accept an already-created instance of an object instead:
procedure AssignComboBoxToList(ComponentName : TxpComboBox;
ListToFill: TStrings) : Boolean;
begin
Assert(Assigned(ListToFill));
ListToFill.Add(ComponentName.Items[ComponentName.ItemIndex);
end;
You can then use it like this:
slComponentValue := TStringList.Create;
try
AssignComboBoxToList(YourComboBox, slComponentValue);
if slComponentValue.Count > 0 then
// Do whatever with the slComponentValue list
finally
slComponentValue.Free;
end;
However, as you're only dealing with a single string, it might be easier to just use a single string; there's not really a TStringList neededhere:
strResult := YourComboBox.Items[YourComboBox.ItemIndex];
With that being said, TComboBox doesn't support multiple selections; TListBox does, but TComboBox displays a drop down list and allows selecting of a single item, making your question somewhat unclear.
I have this record (structure):
type
THexData = record
Address : Cardinal;
DataLen : Cardinal;
Data : string;
end;
And I've declared this list:
HexDataList: TList<THexData>;
I've filled the list with some data. Now I'd like scan ListHexData and sometimes update a element of a record inside HexDataList.
Is it possible? How can I do?
var
Item: THexData;
...
for i := 0 to HexDataList.Count-1 do begin
Item := HexDataList[i];
//update Item
HexDataList[i] := Item;
end;
The bind is that you would like to modify HexDataList[i] in place, but you can't. When I'm working with a TList<T> that holds records I actually sub-class TList<T> and replace the Items property with one that returns a pointer to the item, rather than a copy of the item. That allows for inplace modification.
EDIT
Looking at my code again I realise that I don't actually sub-class TList<T> because it the class is too private to extract pointers to the underlying data. That's probably a good decision. What I actually do is implement my own generic list class and that allows me the freedom to return pointers to records if needed.
I need to understand how to use the generic Delphi 2009 TObjectList. My non-TObjectList attempt looked like
TSomeClass = class(TObject)
private
FList1: Array of TList1;
FList2: Array of TList2;
public
procedure FillArray(var List: Array of TList1; Source: TSource); Overload;
procedure FillArray(var List: Array of TList2; Source: TSource); Overload;
end;
Here, TList1 and TList2 inherits the same constructor constructor TParent.Create(Key: string; Value: string);. However, due to different specialization (e.g. different private fields), they will not be of the same type. So I have to write two nearly identical fill methods:
procedure TSomeClass.FillArray(var List: Array of TList1; Source: TSource);
begin
for i := 0 to Source.List1.Count - 1 do begin
SetLength(List, Length(List) + 1);
List[i] := TList1.Create(Source.List1[i].Key, Source.List1[i].Value);
end;
end;
with FillArray(List: Array of TList2; Source: TSource); being identical, except for the replacement of TList1 with TList2 throughout. As far as I understand, this could be neatly circumvented by using TObjectList and a single fill method; yet, I don't have a clue how to go about this. Do anyone have some good pointers on this? Thanks!
You wouldn't be able to condense that down by using a generic list, since a generic's type is part of the class definition. So a TObjectList<TMyClass1> is different from (and incompatible with) a TObjectList<TMyClass2>. The main benefit of using generic lists over normal TList/TObjectList is improved type safety, with less casts and cleaner code.
Also, if you're using key/value pairs, are you putting them into a list and then retrieving them by searching for a key and returning the associated value? If so, take a look at TDictionary in Generics.Collections. It's a generic key/value hash table that will greatly simplify this process for you.
The Official Embarcadero documentation Wiki on the Generics.Collections.TObjectList contains a simple code example of the TObjectList in action.
I'm not certain exactly what the question is driving at but to address the broad use of a TObjectList, the example initialisation code for a TObjectList might look like this:
var
List: TObjectList<TNewObject>;
Obj: TNewObject;
begin
{ Create a new List. }
List := TObjectList<TNewObject>.Create();
{ Add some items to the List. }
List.Add(TNewObject.Create('One'));
List.Add(TNewObject.Create('Two'));
{ Add a new item, but keep the reference. }
Obj := TNewObject.Create('Three');
List.Add(Obj);
The example code should give you an idea of what the TObjectList can do but If I've understood the question correctly it seems that you would like to be able to add more than one class type to a single instance of the TObjectList? A TObjectList can only be initiated with a single type so it might be better if you initiated the TObjectList with a Interface or Abstract class that is shared by all of the classes you wish to add to it.
One important difference when using a TObjectList compared to creating your own is the existance of the OwnsObjects property which tells the TObjectList whether it owns the objects you add to it and therefore consequently whether it should manage freeing them itself.
Something like this?
TSomeClass = class
private
FList1: TArray<TList1>;
FList2: TArray<TList2>;
public
procedure FillArray<T>(var List: TArray<T>; Source: TSource);
end;
procedure TSomeClass.FillArray<T>(var List: TArray<T>; Source: TSource);
begin
for i := 0 to Source.List1.Count - 1 do begin
SetLength(List, Length(List) + 1);
List[i] := T.Create(Source.List1[i].Key, Source.List1[i].Value);
end;
end;
This, or something like it should do what you want, afaict.
I application that uses strings for different status an item can be during its life.
ie
OPEN,
ACTIVE,
CLOSED,
DELETE,
and so on, at the moment they are all hard coded into code like so
MyVar := 'OPEN';
I am working on changing this as it can be a maintenance problem, so I want to change them all to a constants, I was going to do it like so
MyVar := STATUS_OPEN;
but I would like to group them together into one data structure like so
MyVar := TStatus.Open;
What is the best way to do this in delphi 2007?
I know I can make a record for this, but how do I populate it with the values, so that it is available to all objects in the system without then having to create a variable and populating the values each time?
Ideal I would like to have one central place for the data structure and values, and have them easily accessible (like TStatus.Open) without having to assign it to a variable or creating an object each time I use it.
I am sure there is a simple solution that i am just missing. any ideas?
As Jim mentioned you could use class constants or an enumerated type:
type
TItemStatus = (isOpen, isActive, isClosed);
const
ItemStatusStrings: array[TItemStatus] of string = ('Open', 'Active', 'Closed');
See http://edn.embarcadero.com/article/34324 ("New Delphi language features since Delphi 7".
A class constant would do nicely. From that link above:
type
TClassWithConstant = class
public
const SomeConst = 'This is a class constant';
end;
procedure TForm1.FormCreate(Sender: TObject);
begin
ShowMessage(TClassWithConstant.SomeConst);
end;
I personally have used TOndrej's approach extensively in several large mission critical data processing platforms. The benefit of enumerations is that they can be easily passed around within an application, are very compact (an ordinal type), work perfectly in case statements and are completely type safe. The later point is important for maintenance since deleting or changing enumeration values will cause a compile error (a good think IMHO).
Some gotcha's to look out for with this approach:
Changing the declared order of enum values will foo bar the enum->string lookup array.
If you use the enum in case statements (a nice feature) be sure to take into account new values being added. I usually add an else to the case and throw an exception on unknown values. Much better than falling through the case.
If you are very concerned about the first gotcha, you can use a record in the lookup array and include the enum value in each record and validate the ordering from the unit initialization. This has saved my bacon many times in mission critical systems where maintenance is frequent. This approach can also be used to add additional meta data to each value (a very handy feature).
Best of luck!
unit Unit1;
interface
type
TItemStatusEnum = (isOpen, isActive, isClosed);
TItemStatusConst = class
class function EnumToString(EnumValue : TItemStatusEnum): string;
property OPEN: string index isOpen read EnumToString;
property CLOSED: string index isClosed read EnumToString;
property ACTIVE: string index isActive read EnumToString;
end;
var
ItemStatusConst : TItemStatusConst;
implementation
uses
SysUtils;
type
TItemStatusRec = record
Enum : TItemStatusEnum;
Value : string;
end;
const
ITEM_STATUS_LOOKUP : array[TItemStatusEnum] of TItemStatusRec =
((Enum: isOpen; Value: 'OPEN'),
(Enum: isActive; Value: 'ACTIVE'),
(Enum: isClosed; Value: 'CLOSED'));
procedure ValidateStatusLookupOrder;
var
Status : TItemStatusEnum;
begin
for Status := low(Status) to high(Status) do
if (ITEM_STATUS_LOOKUP[Status].Enum <> Status) then
raise Exception.Create('ITEM_STATUS_LOOKUP values out of order!');
end;
class function TItemStatusConst.EnumToString(EnumValue: TItemStatusEnum): string;
begin
Result := ITEM_STATUS_LOOKUP[EnumValue].Value;
end;
initialization
ValidateStatusLookupOrder;
end.
Update:
Thanks for the critique - you are absolutely correct in that I was solving what I perceived as the problem underlying the question. Below is a much simpler approach if you can live with the constraint that this must ONLY work in Delphi 2007 or later versions (might work in D2006?). Hard to shed those nagging thoughts of backward compatibility ;)
type
ItemStatusConst = record
const OPEN = 'OPEN';
const ACTIVE = 'ACTIVE';
const CLOSED = 'CLOSED';
end;
This approach is simple and has a similar feel to what one might do in a Java or .Net application. Usage semantics are as expected and will work with code completion. A big plus is that the constants are scoped at a record level so there is no risk of clashes with other definitions as happens with unit scoped types.
Sample usage:
ShowMessage(ItemStatusConst.ACTIVE);
ShowMessage(ItemStatusConst.CLOSED);
Just for fun, I have also revised my earlier approach to directly address the original question with a similar outcome. This time I made use of "simulated class properties" (see here) with a property indexer. This is clearly more complex than the record approach, but retains the ability to work with enum values, sets, strings AND can also be extended to implement additional meta data features where required. I believe this works for Delphi versions going as far back as Delphi 5 IIRC.
An example of where I used this technique to great effect was a parsing framework I created in Delphi to handle the full IBM AFPDS print data stream grammar. This flexibility is why I love working in Delphi - it is like a Swiss army knife ;)
Or you could combine #Jim and #TOndrej
TGlobalConsts = class
type
TItemStatus = (isOpen, isActive, isClosed);
const
ItemStatusStrings: array[TItemStatus] of string = ('Open', 'Active', 'Closed');
end;
Although you could make it a class or a record really. Although if it is a class you can add the class functions like #mghie suggested, and instead just get the values from the const array. Personally I prefer having all the strings in a const array in the interface instead of peppered in the function bodies in the implementation.
class function TGlobalConsts.Active: string;
begin
Result := ItemStatusStrings[itsActive];
end;
class function TGlobalConsts.Open: string;
begin
Result := ItemStatusStrings[itsOpen];
end;
There are a lot of ways to do it, that is for sure.
This is something that you can do in all versions of Delphi:
type
TStatus = class
class function Active: string;
class function Open: string;
...
end;
class function TStatus.Active: string;
begin
Result := 'ACTIVE';
end;
class function TStatus.Open: string;
begin
Result := 'OPEN';
end;
You can use this exactly as you want:
MyVar := TStatus.Open;
there is exactly one place to change the strings, and there is only code involved, no runtime instantiation. New features of recent Delphi versions aren't always necessary to do stuff like that...
In addition to what TOndrej said:
One can also declare a record constant:
type
TRecordName = record
Field1: Integer;
Field2: String
end;
const
itemstatus : TRecordName = (
Field1: 0;
Field2: 'valueoffield2'
);
An array of records is also possible, by combining the const record syntax above and the array syntax shown by TOndrej.
However, the way I usually prefer needs initialization:
populating a TStringDynArray with the names of an enum via RTTI
If it then turns out that the names should be configurable, the persistance (however it is arranged) can simply load/store the dynarray.
You could have a global variable of a record type. The record type must have a field for each status you have.
You can populate the record in the Initialize section of any unit, calling a procedure or function declared in that unit. You could have a single unit to specifically do this work, something like StatusTypes.pas.
In the interface section you could declare something like:
type
TStatus = record
OPEN: string;
end;
var
Status: TStatus;