I just started to develop with this program. I did some research about saving the data between activities, and my doubt is. If my application becomes too complex i think it's impracticable to use OnSaveInstanceState because of his statement. Example:
protected override void OnSaveInstanceState(Bundle outState)
{
// Save the values you need from your textview into "outState"-object
outState.PutInt("var1" 1);
outState.PutInt("var2" 2);
outState.PutInt("varn" n);
}
So, if i have 100 variables, i need to declare to 100 variables (and restore them in OnCreate) ? There's any simple way to do that ? This works with objects too ?
Tks.
For long lists of similar variables, there are array Put methods - e.g. PutIntArray
For objects you can always use a serialisation technique - e.g. xml or JSON - and can then save the string
To assist with this, Android provides Parcelable to assist with this mechanism: http://developer.android.com/reference/android/os/Parcelable.html
Personally, I'd use JSON.Net and PutString to store serialized objects.
Related
Unable to understand how "Operations on a stream produce a result, but do not modify its underlying data source" with reference to java 8 streams.
shapes.stream()
.filter(s -> s.getColor() == BLUE)
.forEach(s -> s.setColor(RED));
As per my understanding, forEach is setting the color of object from shapes then how does the top statement hold true?
The value s isn't being altered in this example, however no deep copy is taken, and there is nothing to stop you altering the object referenced.
Are able to can alter an object via a reference in any context in Java and there isn't anything to prevent it. You can only prevent shallow values being altered.
NOTE: Just because you are able to do this doesn't mean it's a good idea. Altering an object inside a lambda is likely to be dangerous as functional programming models assume you are not altering the data being process (always creating new object instead)
If you are going to alter an object, I suggest you use a loop (non functional style) to minimise confusion.
An example of where using a lambda to alter an object has dire consequences is the following.
map.computeIfAbsent(key, k -> {
map.computeIfAbsent(key, k -> 1);
return 2;
});
The behaviour is not deterministic, can result in both key/values being added and for ConcurrentHashMap, this will never return.
As mentioned Here
Most importantly, a stream isn’t a data structure.
You can often create a stream from collections to apply a number of functions on a data structure, but a stream itself is not a data structure. That’s so important, I mentioned it twice! A stream can be composed of multiple functions that create a pipeline that data that flows through. This data cannot be mutated. That is to say the original data structure doesn’t change. However the data can be transformed and later stored in another data structure or perhaps consumed by another operation.
AND as per Java docs
This is possible only if we can prevent interference with the data
source during the execution of a stream pipeline.
And the reason is :
Modifying a stream's data source during execution of a stream pipeline
can cause exceptions, incorrect answers, or nonconformant behavior.
That's all theory, live examples are always good.
So here we go :
Assume we have a List<String> (say :names) and stream of this names.stream(). We can apply .filter(), .reduce(), .map() etc but we can never change the source. Meaning if you try to modify the source (names) you will get an java.util.ConcurrentModificationException .
public static void main(String[] args) {
List<String> names = new ArrayList<>();
names.add("Joe");
names.add("Phoebe");
names.add("Rose");
names.stream().map((obj)->{
names.add("Monika"); //modifying the source of stream, i.e. ConcurrentModificationException
/**
* If we comment the above line, we are modifying the data(doing upper case)
* However the original list still holds the lower-case names(source of stream never changes)
*/
return obj.toUpperCase();
}).forEach(System.out::println);
}
I hope that would help!
I understood the part do not modify its underlying data source - as it will not add/remove elements to the source; I think you are safe since you alter an element, you do not remove it.
You ca read comments from Tagir and Brian Goetz here, where they do agree that this is sort of fine.
The more idiomatic way to do what you want, would be a replace all for example:
shapes.replaceAll(x -> {
if(x.getColor() == BLUE){
x.setColor(RED);
}
return x;
})
I have iOS app that takes data from the server as json and then serializes them into objects of different types. Types can be complicated, can contain subtypes, can inherit, so there is no any limitations. Another thing that makes everything even more complicated is some of types are stored as AnyObject? and only in run time they are being serialized into real types accordingly to the specific rules. Something like that:
class A {
var typeName: String?
var b: AnyObject?
}
Then when it's serialized it can be done something like that:
if let someClass = NSClassFromString(typeName) as? SomeGenericType.Type{
b = someClass.init()
}
Also querying should be done on all the data. Currently I'm trying to store all of them locally, then load into memory and query there from the code. I'm using User defaults, but they have some limitations, also I needed to provide custom coding to make it work, and each time when I add a new field it turned out that I missed something in coding and nothing works. So it's pain.
Ideally I would just do some magic command and all the objects are sent to local storage no matter how complicated they are. The same to extract them from this storage. Also, user change data so I can't just store primary Json. And I don't want to covert objects back to Jason as for it's pain too.
Any suggestions?
If you want to use sqlite then You can store whole object in one row! I means you can create table with 2 columns one is id and second is your dataobject(it's data type should be blob). Then convert your whole object into data. Then store in sqlite table and retrieve it as data then convert it to object when want to use. By this way your object will remains in same format as you asked
Firebase while meant for online synching and storage can also cache everything locally in case you are offline and perform query's against the local cache. It uses JSON.
CouchDB also has a mobile version for iOS.
Both of those are over kill if your dataset is small; you can just store it as a text file and read the JSON back in. See performance characteristics here. The graph is for a 7MB file so if you are significantly less than that your load time may be minimal.
NSKeyedArchiver.archivedData(withRootObject:) is great for storing custom objects as Data objects. The only thing you need to do to be able to use this is to make your custom objects conform to NSCoding. A great example can be found here:
Save custom objects into NSUserDefaults
Once you have the Data version of the object, it can easily be stored in UserDefaults, as a property in CoreData, or even in the app's keychain entries. Depending on your use case, sensitivity of data, and how much data you intend to store, you might want to use any number of storage methods. NSKeyedArchiver.archivedData(withRootObject:) allows you to pretty much use any of them.
I hope this question isn't too general/ambiguous...
I'm writing an iphone quiz game app and am having trouble figuring out the best way to handle data. Currently I am thinking of having a single Model class that holds an array of "User" classes which each have an array of user-specific "Question" classes. I'd like to be able to access the overarching Model from any of my view controllers, but that means I'll probably have to pass the model object to any new view controller, use a singleton, or do something else. What is the best way to access my Model object from other classes? Another factor I'm not sure about is being able to save the data - would I have to use Core Data/SQLite to save my single Model object, or is there a simpler way?
I'd start by designing a schema using CoreData. IMO, its best to start out using CoreData because then you'll never have to convert your data layer to CoreData, in the event that your app scales beyond a simple object or two.
The other route would be to create a web service that returns your data... so you just call the service and it returns a collection of user objects. You can either send down the entire object graph with the questions, or create another service to return a collection of questions for a specific user. If you have a web server handy, this method scales the best because you don't have to rely on app updates to get new questions into your system. I would still use CoreData to cache the results... so that way you're not downloading the same information all the time.
So when it comes to accessing CoreData objects, I use a repository class that's a singleton. This makes it easy for any view controller to grab an instance of the repository and get some data. Here's what something like that might look like;
[[Repository defaultRepository] findFirst:[User class]
where:#"name == 'John'"]
There's a lot of redundant code to fetch data so wrapping that up in an object will help get all that nasty code, like predicates and sorting, out of your view controllers. You can see where I leverage a va_list in the where clause so I can inject that string right into my predicate. Here are some other methods you could implement:
- (NSArray *) findAll:(Class)entity
sortByKey:(NSString *)key
ascending:(BOOL)ascending;
- (NSArray *) findAll:(Class)entity
sortByKey:(NSString *)key
ascending:(BOOL)ascending
where:(NSString *)format, ...;
- (id) findFirst:(Class)entity
where:(NSString *)format, ...;
I'm not sure if this is the preferred way, but I've had a lot of success with this method. Hope this helps!
Check this link, this will help you a lot
Link: http://mobile.tutsplus.com/tutorials/iphone/iphone-sdk_store-data/
This cover 4 major ways to store data in iPhone with sample code.
1) NSUserDeafult
2) Property Lists
3) SQLLite
4) Core Data
Right now I am using ArrayCollection. But I want to change that to Set as I want make sure do duplicate values come.
var addressList:ArrayCollection = new ArrayCollection();
One way is I can use Dictionary and store addresses as a key. And I can just use keys to iterate.
But I am looking for Java HashSet like implementation.
You want to download Polygonal Data Structures. The swc contains a HashSet. If you want Java-style template syntax for Flash, you should also check out Haxe.
The AS3 equivalent to HashMap or HashSet is the Dictionary class, and to a lesser extent, the Object class. Object keys are stored as strings, while with Dictionary the keys are objects. You can't have duplicate entries with either. Are you looking for a specific implementation other than that?
Good day!
I've a legacy application where data access layer consists of classes where queries are done using SqlConnection/SqlCommand and results are passed to upper layers wrapped in untyped DataSets/DataTable.
Now I'm working on integrating this application into newer one where written in ASP.NET MVC 2 where LINQ2SQL is used for data access. I don't want to rewrite fancy logic of generating complex queries that are passed to SqlConnection/SqlCommand in LINQ2SQL (and don't have permission to do this), but I'd like to have result of these queries as strong-typed objects collection instead of untyped DataSets/DataTable.
The basic idea is to wrap old data access code in a nice-looking from ASP.NET MVC "Model".
What is the fast\easy way of doing this?
Additionally to the answer below here is a nice solution based on AutoMapper: http://elegantcode.com/2009/10/16/mapping-from-idatareaderidatarecord-with-automapper/
An approach that you could take is using the DataReader and transfer. So for every object you want to work with define the class in a data transfer object folder (or however your project is structured) then in you data access layer have something along the lines of the below.
We used something very similar to this in a project with a highly normalized database but in the code we did not need that normalization so we used procedures to put the data into more usable objects. If you need to be able to save these objects as well you will need handle translating the objects into database commands.
What is the fast\easy way of doing
this?
Depending on the number of classes etc this is could not be the fastest approach but it will allow you to use the objects very similarly to the Linq objects and depending on the type of collections used (IList, IEnumerable etc) you will be able to use the extension methods on those types of collections.
public IList<NewClass> LoadNewClasses(string abc)
{
List<NewClass> newClasses = new List<NewClass>();
using (DbCommand command = /* Get the command */)
{
// Add parameters
command.Parameters["#Abc"].Value = abc;
// Could also put the DataReader in a using block
IDataReader reader = /* Get Data Reader*/;
while (reader.Read())
{
NewClass newClass = new NewClass();
newClass.Id = (byte)reader["Id"];
newClass.Name = (string)reader["Name"];
newClasses.Add(newClass);
}
reader.Close();
}
return newClasses;
}