Can you please give me an example when to use OrderedSet instead of Set? I've run a couple of tests and even tho the immutable-js documentation says
Iteration order of a Set is undefined, however is stable
it seems element order within Set is always the same as the one in which elements were added.
That's what seems to be the sole benefit of the OrderedSet structure:
A type of Set that has the additional guarantee that the iteration order of values will be the order in which they were added.
It coincidally does add elements at the end, but it is not guaranteed to always be that way. It might change in the next release and it does not always have to be predictable. All it promises is to be stable across multiple iterations over the same data.
To be honest, I can't see any useful use case for OrderedSet. Depending on the needs, List, Map or OrderedMap or even Set are better suited.
If you manage to update a Set, it can change the order. Again, this is usually a bad choice for a data structure and you probably should rearrange your data structure, e.g. use OrderedMap or List instead.
The following sample shows that the order can be a bit unexpected:
function modifySet(set) {
set = set.add(0);
set = set.add(1);
set = set.add(2);
return set.remove(0);
}
let unorderedSet = Immutable.Set([4,5]);
unorderedSet = modifySet(unorderedSet);
console.log('Set:');
for (const value of unorderedSet) {
console.log(value);
}
let orderedSet = Immutable.OrderedSet([4,5]);
orderedSet = modifySet(orderedSet);
console.log('OrderedSet:');
for (const value of orderedSet) {
console.log(value);
}
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/immutable/4.0.0-rc.12/immutable.js"></script>
Since you can modify keys (!) of a set, it can reorder the elements too:
let set = Immutable.Set([ Immutable.Map({b:1, a:true}), Immutable.Map({b:2,a:true}), Immutable.Map({b:3,a:true}) ])
.map((t) => {
if (t.get('b') === 2) return t.set('a', false);
return t;
});
console.log('2 is now at the end');
console.log(set.toJS());
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/immutable/4.0.0-rc.12/immutable.js"></script>
To add insult to injury, there is a bug in ImmutableJs RC12, which makes OrderedSet behave in the same way (moving the updated element to the end of the list). That one is already fixed in the (so far) unreleased upcoming 4.0 release.
Ok that was an interesting excursion, you made us (the loose group of maintainers) look again into how this rarely used structure works.
I am learning React and just created a simple todo app using only React. My todo app has the standard structure of having a text input and an "ADD" button next to it. The user would type their todo in the input and every time they click on the "ADD" button next to it, a new ordered list of their inputs would appear underneath the input and "ADD" button.
The user can also delete a todo entry by clicking on the entries individually, like this:
To accomplish this behaviour of deleting entries, I used this delete function:
delete(elem) {
for (var i = 0; i < this.state.listArray.length; i++) {
if (this.state.listArray[i] === elem) {
this.state.listArray.splice(i, 1);
this.setState({
listArray: this.state.listArray
});
break;
}
}
}
My todo app works exactly the way that I want it to work, but as I look at other people's more conventional approach to this delete function, they either just simply use the splice method or the filter method.
For the splice method approach, they apparently just simply "remove" the unwanted entry from the listArray when the user clicks the particular entry. This does not work for me as using this method results in all my entries getting deleted except for the entry that I clicked on, which is the one that I want to delete.
On the other hand, the filter method approach apparently works by comparing the elem, which is the data passed from a child component, with each element in the listArray, and if the element in the for loop does not equal to the elem, then it would be passed onto a new array. This new array would be the one to not be deleted. This approach works better than the simple splice approach, however, one problem that I had encountered with this approach is that if I have more than one entry of the same value, for example, "Feed the dog". I only want one of the "Feed the dog" entries to be deleted, but it deletes both of them.
I thought of an approach to tackle this problem, eventually coming up with the current version of my code, which uses the splice method, but the splice method is used before I set it in the state. As evident here:
this.state.listArray.splice(i, 1);
this.setState({
listArray: this.state.listArray
});
My question can be broken down into three subquestions:
Considering that React states should be immutable, is the first line of the code above mutating my state? Is this approach not okay?
I thought that all React states were only possible to be changed inside a "setState" function, but my first line of code from above is not inside a setState function, yet it changed the state of listArray. How is this possible?
If my approach is mutating the state and is not ideal, how would you go about making the delete function so that it only deletes one entry and not more than one if there are multiple similar entries?
Yes, splice affects the array it acts on so don't use in this way. Instead you need to create a new array of the correct elements:
this.setState({
listArray: this.state.listArray.filter((el, idx) => idx !== i);
});
If you want to remove only the first instance, maybe couple with a findIndex (although indexOf would work in your example as well) first:
delete(elem) {
const idxToFilter = this.state.listArray.findIndex(el => el === elem);
if (idxToFilter < 0) {
return;
}
this.setState({
listArray: this.state.listArray.filter((el, idx) => idx !== idxToFilter);
});
}
This creates a new array without modifying the old which will cause anything that reacts to listArray changing to be notified since the reference has changed.
I am creating a graphql server using express, and I have a resolver that can transform my fields as per input from the user query.
The transformer that I am using is returning a function, which is the cause of my issues.
I want to sort my result by some user determined field, but since the field is a function, it won't work.
So the resolver looks like this:
const resolver = (req, param) => {
return {
history: async input => {
let size = input.pageSize || 3;
let start = (input.page || 0) * size;
let end = start + size;
let sortField = (input.sort || {}).field || 'timestamp';
return fs.promises.readFile("./history/blitz.json", "utf8").then(data =>
JSON.parse(data)
.slice(start, end)
.map(job => historyTransformer(job))
.sort((a,b) => a[sortField] > b[sortField] ? 1 : a[sortField] < b[sortField] ? -1 : 0)
);
}
};
};
and the transformer:
const historyTransformer = job => {
return {
...job,
timestamp: input =>
dateFormat(job.timestamp, input.format || "mm:hh dd-mm-yyyy")
};
};
I am not sure if I am missing something but is there an easy way of resolving the function call before starting the sorting?
GraphQL fields are resolved in a hierarchal manner, such that the history field has to resolve before any of its child fields (like timestamp) can be resolved. If the child field's resolver transforms the underlying property and your intent is to somehow use that value in the parent resolver (in this case, to do some sorting), that's tricky because you're working against the execution flow.
Because you're working with dates, you should consider whether the format of the field even matters. As a user, if I sort by timestamp, I expect the results to be sorted chronologically. Even if the response is formatted to put the time first, I probably don't want dates with the same times but different years grouped together. Of course, I don't know your business requirements and it still doesn't solve the problem if we're working with something else, like translations, which would cause the same problem.
There's two solutions I can think of:
Update your schema and lift the format argument into the parent field. This is easier to implement, but obviously not as nice as putting the argument on the field it applies to.
Keep the argument where it is, but parse the info parameter passed to the resolver to determine the value of the argument inside the parent resolver. This way, you can keep the argument on the child field, but move the actual formatting logic into the parent resolver.
Imagine I have an observable giving me chocolate cookies, but I don't want to eat white ones. But since I'm blind I have to hand them over to a service to find out if a given cookie is white or not. But I don't get the answer right away. I'd rather get another observable.
So here is the code I came up with, but I really don't like it and I think there should be a much easier and more elegant solution to this:
// pipe the observable
chocolateCookieObservable$.pipe(
// use a switchMap to create a new stream containing combineLatest which combines...
switchMap((chocolateCookie: ChocolateCookie) => combineLatest(
// an artificially created stream with exactly one cookie...
of(chocolateCookie),
// and the answer (also an observable) of my cookie service
this.chocolateCookieService
.isChocolateCookieWithWhiteChocolate(chocolateCookie),
// so I get an observable to an array containing those two things
)),
// filtering the resulting observable array by the information contained in
// the array (is the cookie white)?
filter(([chocolateCookie, isWhite]: [ChocolateCookie, boolean]) => !isWhite),
// mapping the array so that I can throw away the boolean again, ending up
// with only the now filtered cookies and nothing more
map(([chocolateCookie]: [ChocolateCookie, boolean]) => chocolateCookie),
).subscribe((chocolateCookie: ChocolateCookie) => {
this.eat(chocolateCookie);
}
While this does work and is somewhat reasonable, it really gets extremely confusing if you have to encapsulate more of those within each other. Isn't there any way to directly filter the observable or mapping it so I get the information I need without using that strange combineLatest-of combination?
You should break this down into multiple statements.
Working this way will allow you to produce more readable, maintainable code when implementing complex async workflows with Observables.
When refactored, your code would look something like this:
const isWhite$ = chocolateCookie$.pipe(
switchMap((chocolateCookie: ChocolateCookie) => this.chocolateCookieService.isChocolateCookieWithWhiteChocolate(chocolateCookie)),
);
chocolateCookie$.pipe(
withLatestFrom(isWhite$),
filter(([chocolateCookie, isWhite]: [ChocolateCookie, boolean]) => !isWhite),
map(([chocolateCookie]: [ChocolateCookie, boolean]) => chocolateCookie),
).subscribe((chocolateCookie: ChocolateCookie) => {
this.eat(chocolateCookie);
}
Also, note that you don't really need to append 'Observable' to the end of the variable name as you are already using the $ syntax to denote that the variable is an Observable.
You could use filter inside of the switchMap to filter out white cookies, and then map response from the service back to the cookie
Heres an example:
chocolateCookieObservable$.pipe(
switchMap((chocolateCookie: ChocolateCookie) =>
// async test if its white
this.chocolateCookieService
.isChocolateCookieWithWhiteChocolate(chocolateCookie)
.pipe(
// filter out white cookies
filter(isWhite => !isWhite),
// map back from isWhite to the cookie
mapTo(chocolateCookie)
)
)
).subscribe((chocolateCookie: ChocolateCookie) => {
// mmm, cookies!!!
this.eat(chocolateCookie);
})
I'm trying to test out Firebase to allow users to post comments using push. I want to display the data I retrieve with the following;
fbl.child('sell').limit(20).on("value", function(fbdata) {
// handle data display here
}
The problem is the data is returned in order of oldest to newest - I want it in reversed order. Can Firebase do this?
Since this answer was written, Firebase has added a feature that allows ordering by any child or by value. So there are now four ways to order data: by key, by value, by priority, or by the value of any named child. See this blog post that introduces the new ordering capabilities.
The basic approaches remain the same though:
1. Add a child property with the inverted timestamp and then order on that.
2. Read the children in ascending order and then invert them on the client.
Firebase supports retrieving child nodes of a collection in two ways:
by name
by priority
What you're getting now is by name, which happens to be chronological. That's no coincidence btw: when you push an item into a collection, the name is generated to ensure the children are ordered in this way. To quote the Firebase documentation for push:
The unique name generated by push() is prefixed with a client-generated timestamp so that the resulting list will be chronologically-sorted.
The Firebase guide on ordered data has this to say on the topic:
How Data is Ordered
By default, children at a Firebase node are sorted lexicographically by name. Using push() can generate child names that naturally sort chronologically, but many applications require their data to be sorted in other ways. Firebase lets developers specify the ordering of items in a list by specifying a custom priority for each item.
The simplest way to get the behavior you want is to also specify an always-decreasing priority when you add the item:
var ref = new Firebase('https://your.firebaseio.com/sell');
var item = ref.push();
item.setWithPriority(yourObject, 0 - Date.now());
Update
You'll also have to retrieve the children differently:
fbl.child('sell').startAt().limitToLast(20).on('child_added', function(fbdata) {
console.log(fbdata.exportVal());
})
In my test using on('child_added' ensures that the last few children added are returned in reverse chronological order. Using on('value' on the other hand, returns them in the order of their name.
Be sure to read the section "Reading ordered data", which explains the usage of the child_* events to retrieve (ordered) children.
A bin to demonstrate this: http://jsbin.com/nonawe/3/watch?js,console
Since firebase 2.0.x you can use limitLast() to achieve that:
fbl.child('sell').orderByValue().limitLast(20).on("value", function(fbdataSnapshot) {
// fbdataSnapshot is returned in the ascending order
// you will still need to order these 20 items in
// in a descending order
}
Here's a link to the announcement: More querying capabilities in Firebase
To augment Frank's answer, it's also possible to grab the most recent records--even if you haven't bothered to order them using priorities--by simply using endAt().limit(x) like this demo:
var fb = new Firebase(URL);
// listen for all changes and update
fb.endAt().limit(100).on('value', update);
// print the output of our array
function update(snap) {
var list = [];
snap.forEach(function(ss) {
var data = ss.val();
data['.priority'] = ss.getPriority();
data['.name'] = ss.name();
list.unshift(data);
});
// print/process the results...
}
Note that this is quite performant even up to perhaps a thousand records (assuming the payloads are small). For more robust usages, Frank's answer is authoritative and much more scalable.
This brute force can also be optimized to work with bigger data or more records by doing things like monitoring child_added/child_removed/child_moved events in lieu of value, and using a debounce to apply DOM updates in bulk instead of individually.
DOM updates, naturally, are a stinker regardless of the approach, once you get into the hundreds of elements, so the debounce approach (or a React.js solution, which is essentially an uber debounce) is a great tool to have.
There is really no way but seems we have the recyclerview we can have this
query=mCommentsReference.orderByChild("date_added");
query.keepSynced(true);
// Initialize Views
mRecyclerView = (RecyclerView) view.findViewById(R.id.recyclerView);
mManager = new LinearLayoutManager(getContext());
// mManager.setReverseLayout(false);
mManager.setReverseLayout(true);
mManager.setStackFromEnd(true);
mRecyclerView.setHasFixedSize(true);
mRecyclerView.setLayoutManager(mManager);
I have a date variable (long) and wanted to keep the newest items on top of the list. So what I did was:
Add a new long field 'dateInverse'
Add a new method called 'getDateInverse', which just returns: Long.MAX_VALUE - date;
Create my query with: .orderByChild("dateInverse")
Presto! :p
You are searching limitTolast(Int x) .This will give you the last "x" higher elements of your database (they are in ascending order) but they are the "x" higher elements
if you got in your database {10,300,150,240,2,24,220}
this method:
myFirebaseRef.orderByChild("highScore").limitToLast(4)
will retrive you : {150,220,240,300}
In Android there is a way to actually reverse the data in an Arraylist of objects through the Adapter. In my case I could not use the LayoutManager to reverse the results in descending order since I was using a horizontal Recyclerview to display the data. Setting the following parameters to the recyclerview messed up my UI experience:
llManager.setReverseLayout(true);
llManager.setStackFromEnd(true);
The only working way I found around this was through the BindViewHolder method of the RecyclerView adapter:
#Override
public void onBindViewHolder(final RecyclerView.ViewHolder holder, int position) {
final SuperPost superPost = superList.get(getItemCount() - position - 1);
}
Hope this answer will help all the devs out there who are struggling with this issue in Firebase.
Firebase: How to display a thread of items in reverse order with a limit for each request and an indicator for a "load more" button.
This will get the last 10 items of the list
FBRef.child("childName")
.limitToLast(loadMoreLimit) // loadMoreLimit = 10 for example
This will get the last 10 items. Grab the id of the last record in the list and save for the load more functionality. Next, convert the collection of objects into and an array and do a list.reverse().
LOAD MORE Functionality: The next call will do two things, it will get the next sequence of list items based on the reference id from the first request and give you an indicator if you need to display the "load more" button.
this.FBRef
.child("childName")
.endAt(null, lastThreadId) // Get this from the previous step
.limitToLast(loadMoreLimit+2)
You will need to strip the first and last item of this object collection. The first item is the reference to get this list. The last item is an indicator for the show more button.
I have a bunch of other logic that will keep everything clean. You will need to add this code only for the load more functionality.
list = snapObjectAsArray; // The list is an array from snapObject
lastItemId = key; // get the first key of the list
if (list.length < loadMoreLimit+1) {
lastItemId = false;
}
if (list.length > loadMoreLimit+1) {
list.pop();
}
if (list.length > loadMoreLimit) {
list.shift();
}
// Return the list.reverse() and lastItemId
// If lastItemId is an ID, it will be used for the next reference and a flag to show the "load more" button.
}
I'm using ReactFire for easy Firebase integration.
Basically, it helps me storing the datas into the component state, as an array. Then, all I have to use is the reverse() function (read more)
Here is how I achieve this :
import React, { Component, PropTypes } from 'react';
import ReactMixin from 'react-mixin';
import ReactFireMixin from 'reactfire';
import Firebase from '../../../utils/firebaseUtils'; // Firebase.initializeApp(config);
#ReactMixin.decorate(ReactFireMixin)
export default class Add extends Component {
constructor(args) {
super(args);
this.state = {
articles: []
};
}
componentWillMount() {
let ref = Firebase.database().ref('articles').orderByChild('insertDate').limitToLast(10);
this.bindAsArray(ref, 'articles'); // bind retrieved data to this.state.articles
}
render() {
return (
<div>
{
this.state.articles.reverse().map(function(article) {
return <div>{article.title}</div>
})
}
</div>
);
}
}
There is a better way. You should order by negative server timestamp. How to get negative server timestamp even offline? There is an hidden field which helps. Related snippet from documentation:
var offsetRef = new Firebase("https://<YOUR-FIREBASE-APP>.firebaseio.com/.info/serverTimeOffset");
offsetRef.on("value", function(snap) {
var offset = snap.val();
var estimatedServerTimeMs = new Date().getTime() + offset;
});
To add to Dave Vávra's answer, I use a negative timestamp as my sort_key like so
Setting
const timestamp = new Date().getTime();
const data = {
name: 'John Doe',
city: 'New York',
sort_key: timestamp * -1 // Gets the negative value of the timestamp
}
Getting
const ref = firebase.database().ref('business-images').child(id);
const query = ref.orderByChild('sort_key');
return $firebaseArray(query); // AngularFire function
This fetches all objects from newest to oldest. You can also $indexOn the sortKey to make it run even faster
I had this problem too, I found a very simple solution to this that doesn't involved manipulating the data in anyway. If you are rending the result to the DOM, in a list of some sort. You can use flexbox and setup a class to reverse the elements in their container.
.reverse {
display: flex;
flex-direction: column-reverse;
}
myarray.reverse(); or this.myitems = items.map(item => item).reverse();
I did this by prepend.
query.orderByChild('sell').limitToLast(4).on("value", function(snapshot){
snapshot.forEach(function (childSnapshot) {
// PREPEND
});
});
Someone has pointed out that there are 2 ways to do this:
Manipulate the data client-side
Make a query that will order the data
The easiest way that I have found to do this is to use option 1, but through a LinkedList. I just append each of the objects to the front of the stack. It is flexible enough to still allow the list to be used in a ListView or RecyclerView. This way even though they come in order oldest to newest, you can still view, or retrieve, newest to oldest.
You can add a column named orderColumn where you save time as
Long refrenceTime = "large future time";
Long currentTime = "currentTime";
Long order = refrenceTime - currentTime;
now save Long order in column named orderColumn and when you retrieve data
as orderBy(orderColumn) you will get what you need.
just use reverse() on the array , suppose if you are storing the values to an array items[] then do a this.items.reverse()
ref.subscribe(snapshots => {
this.loading.dismiss();
this.items = [];
snapshots.forEach(snapshot => {
this.items.push(snapshot);
});
**this.items.reverse();**
},
For me it was limitToLast that worked. I also found out that limitLast is NOT a function:)
const query = messagesRef.orderBy('createdAt', 'asc').limitToLast(25);
The above is what worked for me.
PRINT in reverse order
Let's think outside the box... If your information will be printed directly into user's screen (without any content that needs to be modified in a consecutive order, like a sum or something), simply print from bottom to top.
So, instead of inserting each new block of content to the end of the print space (A += B), add that block to the beginning (A = B+A).
If you'll include the elements as a consecutive ordered list, the DOM can put the numbers for you if you insert each element as a List Item (<li>) inside an Ordered Lists (<ol>).
This way you save space from your database, avoiding unnecesary reversed data.