I'm using dc.js library to generate graphs and I would like to be able to retrieve the filtered data when filters are applied.
Create another dimension and then call dimension.top(Infinity) on it.
https://github.com/square/crossfilter/wiki/API-Reference#dimension_top
You will need the extra dimension because dimensions do not observe their own filters, only the filters on other dimensions.
Then you can use e.g. d3.csv.format to produce text, if you need to.
https://github.com/mbostock/d3/wiki/CSV#format
In the version 4 of d3.js d3.csv.format doesn't exist, you must use d3.csvFormat instead.
const cf = crossfilter(data);
csvDimension = cf.dimension( x => x );
csvContent = d3.csvFormat(csvDimension.top(Infinity), [field, field2, ...]);
As Gordon said, csvDimension must be a new dimension in order for the filters to be applied.
Related
Does anyone know if there's an easy way to negate a parse query? Something like this:
Parse.Query.not(query)
More specifically I want to do a relational query that gets everything except for the objects within the query. For example:
const relation = myParseObject.relation("myRelation");
const query = relation.query();
const negatedQuery = Parse.Query.not(query);
return await negatedQuery.find();
I know one solution would be to fetch the objects in the relation and then create a new query by looping through the objectIds using query.notEqualTo("objectId", fetchedObjectIds[i]), but this seems really circuitous...
Any help would be much appreciated!
doesNotMatchKeyInQuery is the solution as Davi Macedo pointed out in the comments.
For example, if I wanted to get all of the Comments that are not in an Article's relation, I would do the following:
const relationQuery = article.relation("comments").query();
const notInRelationQuery = new Parse.Query("Comment");
notInRelationQuery.doesNotMatchKeyInQuery("objectId", "objectId", relationQuery);
const notRelatedComments = await notInRelationQuery.find();
How I understand it is that the first argument is specifying the key in the objects that we are fetching. The second argument is specifying the key in the objects that are in the query that we're about to argue. And lastly we argue a query for the objects we don't want. So, it essentially finds the objects you don't want and then compares the values of the objects you do want to the values of the objects you don't want for the argued keys. It then returns all the objects you do want. I could probably write that more succinctly, but w/e.
Utilizing the solution provided by Gordon, I've successfully created a selectable table that contains aggregated data. Now I would like to filter the data with the text-filter-widget.
I understand that the filter needs an array to work properly. What I am trying to understand is how might one be able to update the table rows when the table filters are looking at a group?
A text filter widget is different from a chart in that it takes a dimension to filter on.
We also need to declare a second market dimension so that it will filter the table.
Thus
var marketDim, marketDim2;
// ...
marketDim = facts.dimension(function(d) {
return d.Location;
});
marketDim2 = facts.dimension(function(d) {
return d.Location;
});
// ...
search
.dimension(marketDim2);
Fork of your fiddle.
I want to create a new table based on this one:
that filters for Warehouse=2 and "drops" the columns "Price" and "Cost" like this:
I have managed to apply the filter in the first step using:
FILTER(oldtable;oldtable[Warehouse]=2)
and then in the next step cold create another table that only selects the required columns using:
newtable2=SELECTCOLUMNS("newtable1";"Articlename";...)
But I want to be able to combine these two functions and create the table straight away.
This is very simple, because in your first step, a table is returned which you can use directly in your second statement.
newTabel = SELECTCOLUMNS(FILTER(warehouse;warehouse[Warehouse]=2);"ArticleName";warehouse[Articlename];"AmountSold";warehouse[AmountSold];"WareHouse";warehouse[Warehouse])
If you want to keep the overview, you can also use variables and return:
newTabel =
var filteredTable = FILTER(warehouse;warehouse[Warehouse]=2)
return SELECTCOLUMNS(filteredTable;"ArticleName";warehouse[Articlename];"AmountSold";warehouse[AmountSold];"WareHouse";warehouse[Warehouse])
I'm trying to use linq to objects with html agility pack to join two result sets on their relative ordinal position. One set is a list of headers, the other is a set of tables, with each table corresponding to one of the header values. Each set has a count of five. I've read the post here which looks very similar, but can't get it to translate to my purposes.
Here is what I'm using to get the two html node collections:
HtmlNodeCollection ratingsChgsHdrs = htmlDoc.DocumentNode.SelectNodes("//div[#id='calendar-header']");
HtmlNodeCollection ratingsChgsTbls = htmlDoc.DocumentNode.SelectNodes("//table[#class='calendar-table']");
The collection ratingsChgsHdrs contains the headers for each of the tables in ratingsChgsTbls, within the InnerText property. The end result I'm looking for is one result set consisting of all of the rows from all five tables, with the header value added as a property to each row. I hope that is clear.. any help would be great.
This might work:
ratingsChgsHdrs.Select((x, i) => new { x, ratingsChgsTbls.ElementAt(i) });
I have a Typed DataSet DataTable which inherits TypedTableBase<T>, which in turn implements IEnumerable<T>. I can't seem to get this to work.
myDataTable.OrderBy(x => x.ID).ThenBy(y => y.ID2);
Instead I have to assign this statement to an IEnumerable(or List), then refill my DataTable manually with the newly ordered IEnumerable before I commit. Is this how it is intended to be? I've thought about creating my own extension method that will empty/refill my DataTables, but would this be wise?
Note: Typically I only need to sort for viewing purposes using DataView. But in this case I have a custom routine that must create a new access database with sorting requirements, which means I need to sort the actual DataTable so that I may re-commit it.
Thank you.
In order to do what you want, you must add the following reference to your project:
System.Data.DataSetExtensions
Once you have that added, you can order your DataTable like this:
var query = myDataTable.OrderBy(x => x.ID).ThenBy(y => y.ID2);
// use the DataView generated from the LINQ query
DataView dtv = query.AsDataView();
In order to iterate through the DataView, you can do the following:
var dtv = query.AsDataView();
foreach(DataRowView rw in dtv)
{
// you can also cast back to the typed data...
MyCustomRowType typedRow = (MyCustomRowType) rw.Row;
// do something here...
}
Alternatively you can typecast via LINQ this way:
var dtv = query.AsDataView().Cast<MyCustomRowType>();
// rowItem is of type MyCustomRowType...
foreach(var rowItem in dtv)
{
// do something here...
}
Linq extension methods do not alter the source enumerable.
var numbers = new int[]{1,2,3};
var reversed = numbers.OrderByDescending(x=>x);
foreach(var number in reversed)
Console.Write(number); // 321
foreach(var number in numbers)
Console.Write(number); // 123
If you want to sort a DataTable, you should be using DataViews. You create a view on your DataTable, then apply a Sort or Filter to it, then bind against it. Keep in mind DataSets are an older technology and not quite up to date on the latest and the greatest. A "newer" approach would be to use the Entity Framework.