I add a line chart with g.Raphael.js like so:
var tl = paper.linechart(x, y, w, h, [[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]], [trendline], { axis: "0 0 0 1", colors:['#fff'] });
Sometimes, "trendline" will be an empty array, which results in Y-axis labels of "NaN" and "Infinity". How can I hide those labels in those cases?
I've tried playing with axisystep but that didn't make a difference.
Perhaps line chart could use a "axisylabels" setting like the dots chart has?
I think you could do the following to hide the labels in such cases:
var chart = paper.linechart(x, y, w, h,
[[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]], [trendline],
{ axis: "0 0 0 1", colors:['#fff'] });
// hide labels if there is no data
if (trendline.length == 0) {
var y_labels = chart.axis[0].text.items;
for (var i in y_labels) {
y_labels[i].attr({'text': ""});
};
}
Related
OK the solution should be simple... like =IF(AG3 = "", "")
but I am unable to add the clause to my current formula as seen below: Any suggestions?
=IF(
IF(AF3 <> "y",
SUM(IFNA(VLOOKUP($AG3, RICS_TimeClocks!Q$3:U, 4, 0), 0),
IFNA(VLOOKUP($AG3, RICS_TimeClocks!V$3:Z, 4, 0), 0))
,"0")
= "0", "", SUM(IFNA(VLOOKUP($AG3, RICS_TimeClocks!Q$3:U, 4, 0), 0),
IFNA(VLOOKUP($AG3, RICS_TimeClocks!V$3:Z, 4, 0), 0)))
Let's say your current formula is "FORMULA", you would have to do the following:
=IF(AG3="",,FORMULA)
Now replace FORMULA with your actual formula and you get
=IF(AG3="",,IF(
IF(AF3 <> "y",
SUM(IFNA(VLOOKUP($AG3, RICS_TimeClocks!Q$3:U, 4, 0), 0),
IFNA(VLOOKUP($AG3, RICS_TimeClocks!V$3:Z, 4, 0), 0))
,"0")
= "0", "", SUM(IFNA(VLOOKUP($AG3, RICS_TimeClocks!Q$3:U, 4, 0), 0),
IFNA(VLOOKUP($AG3, RICS_TimeClocks!V$3:Z, 4, 0), 0))))
I have seen a lot of answers to this type of question but I have still not found a solution. This is my bar chart:
All I would like is to be able to set the y axis scale to display from a negative number, and for the the labels not to overlap the chart.
I have the following options:
var options = {
barValueSpacing : 5,
barDatasetSpacing : 0,
scaleBeginAtZero: false
}
but it doesn't set the starting point as -2, I am not sure why.
Have looked at https://jsfiddle.net/1fkc5jt7/ which does exactly what I want but it does not work on my chart for some reason.
You are missing a ,
var options = {
barValueSpacing : 5,
**barDatasetSpacing : 0,**
scaleBeginAtZero: false
};
I am writing a program that outputs a list of ordered lists of numbers. Say the output is as follows:
[1,1,1];
[1,1,2]
I would like to look at the output by eye and make some sense of it, but my output is hundreds to thousands of lines long. I would like to write the output in the following more compact format: [1,1,1/2], where the slash indicates that in the third slot I can have a 1 or a 2. So, for a longer example, [1/2, 1/3, 5, 8/9] would be the compact way of writing [1,1,5,8];[1,1,5,9];[1,3,5,8]; etc. Can anyone suggest a pseudocode algorithm for accomplishing this?
Edit: All of the lists are the same length. Also, I expect in general to have multiple lists at the end. For example {[1,1,2], [1,1,3], [1,2,4]} should become {[1,1,2/3], [1,2,4]}.
What'd I do is use a hash at each element in the first list. You'd then iterate through the remaining lists, and for each position in the other lists, you'd check against the hash in the first / original list for that index to see if you'd seen it before. So you'd end up with something like:
[1 : {1}, 1: {1, 3}, 5: {5}, 8: {8, 9}]
And then when printing / formatting the list, you'd just print each key in the hash, except you'd use slashes or whatever.
EDIT: Bad Psuedocode (python)(untested):
def shorten_list(list_of_lists):
primary_list = list_of_lists[0]
hash_values = [{} * len(primary_list)]
for i in range(len(list_of_lists)):
current_list = list_of_lists[i]
for j in range(current_list):
num = current_list[j]
if num not in hash_values[j]:
hash_values[j] = j
for i in range(len(hash_values)):
current_dict = hash_values[i]
print primary_list[i]
for key in current_dict:
if key != primary_list[i]:
print '/', key
Here's actual code to sort the lists the way you wanted. But maybe the most useful visualization would be a scatter plot. Import the data into your favorite spreadsheet, and plot away.
$(document).ready( function(){
var numbers = [
[1, 1, 5, 8],
[1, 1, 5, 9],
[1, 3, 5],
[1, 1, 5, 10, 15]];
$('#output').text(JSON.stringify(compactNumbers(numbers)));
});
function compactNumbers(numberlists){
var output = [];
for(var i = 0; i < numberlists.length; i++){
for(var j = 0; j < numberlists[i].length; j++) {
if(!output[j]) output[j] = [];
if($.inArray(numberlists[i][j], output[j]) == -1){
output[j].push(numberlists[i][j]);
}
}
}
return(output);
}
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/2.1.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<div id="output"></div>
I am trying to plot yearly data on a geochart. I would like the most recent data on top, but for whatever reason, the earliest year is always on top in the actual visualization.
I have tried re-ordering the table to have the latest years as the first entries in the data with no effect.
I thought that maybe it was happening because I used a view to filter my data, but the filter is not reordering the items with the older ones first (so that shouldn't impact how it is displayed).
I do not want to filter out data since I use transparency to display all points. Here is some sample code that displays the same problem:
function drawVisualization() {
var data = new google.visualization.DataTable();
data.addColumn('number', 'Latitude');
data.addColumn('number', 'Longitude');
data.addColumn('number', 'Color');
data.addColumn('number', 'Output (MW)');
data.addRows([
[35, 135, 2, 334],
[35, 135, 1, 100],
[35.1, 135.1, 1, 100],
[35.1, 135, 1, 100],
[35, 135.1, 1, 100],
[34.9, 134.9, 1, 100],
[34.9, 135, 1, 100],
[35, 135.1, 1, 100],
]);
var geochart = new google.visualization.GeoChart(
document.getElementById('visualization'));
geochart.draw(data, {
colorAxis: {
'minValue': 1,
'maxValue': 2,
'values': [1, 2],
'colors': ['black','red'],
},
'markerOpacity': 0.5,
'region': 'JP'
});
}
I can change the values in column 2 or 3 (0-indexed), or I can change the order of the entries in to the data table, but I keep getting the same result. I have a feeling it always sticks bigger sized values in the back so you can still see the little values, but I'm wondering if there is any authoritative reference on it, or any way to get around it.
This is what it looks like no matter what I do:
What I want it to look like is as follows (manipulated the SVG manually to adjust the Z-order):
I played around with it for a bit, and I think you're right: it's automatically z-indexing the markers in size-order. If I read your intent correctly, you are looking to show some subset of years, and you want the markers to be z-indexed by years. I think you can accomplish that with some custom filtering: sort your data by location and year, then for every location, filter out every year with a smaller size than any of the newer years. Something like this should work:
// order by location and year (descending)
var rows = data.getSortedRows([0, 1, {column: 2, desc: true}]);
// parse the rows backwards, removing all years where a location has a newer year with a larger size value
// we don't need to parse row 0, since that will always be the latest year for some location
var size, lat, long;
for (var i = rows.length - 1; i > 0; i--) {
size = data.getValue(rows[i], 3);
lat = data.getValue(rows[i], 0);
long = data.getValue(rows[i], 1);
for (var j = i - 1; j >= 0 && lat == data.getValue(rows[j], 0) && long == data.getValue(rows[i], 1); j--) {
if (size < data.getValue(rows[j], 3)) {
rows.splice(i, 1);
break;
}
}
}
var view = new google.visualization.DataView(data);
view.setRows(rows);
Here's a working example based on your code: http://jsfiddle.net/asgallant/36AmD/
You are correct that the order of the markers is determined by the size, with the larger markers drawn first so they end up below the smaller markers, which is a convenience for most applications. If you wish to hide 'later' markers based on order, you'll have to do that another way, perhaps by hiding the rows of data.
Is there a reason it makes sense to hide data if it covers 'earlier' data? Perhaps an option could be added to disable this automatic reordering, especially if transparent colors are used to allow you to see through.
Try this, helped me in a project:
setTimeout(function () {
$('.google-visualization-table').css("z-index", "1");
}, 500);
I have a collection of lists with each containing around 6 to 7 values. Like,
list1 = 2,4,7,4,9,5
list2 = 4,3,7.3,9,8,1.2
list3 = 2,2.4,7,9,8,5
list4 = 9,1.6,4,3,4,1
list5 = 2,5,7,9,1,4
list6 = 6,8,7,2,1,5
list7 = 4,2,5,2,1,3
Now I want to sort these with index1 as primary and index3 as secondary and index2 as tertiary and so on. That is, the output should be like:
2,2.4,7,9,8,5
2,4,7,4,9,5
2,5,7,9,1,4
4,2,5,2,1,3
6,8,7,2,1,5
9,1.6,4,3,4,1
I want the list order to be sorted for index1 first and if the values are same for index1 than sorting is done on index3 and if further same than on index2. Here the number of lists are less which can increase to 20 and the indexes can grow up to 20 as well.
The algorithm I want to know is the same as that of iTunes song sorting, in which songs with the same album are sorted first and then by artist and then by rank and then by name. That's the album's if album names are the same then sorting is done on the artist if same, then by rank and so on. The code can be in C/C++/tcl/shell.
sort -n -t ',' -k 1 -k 3 -k 2
Feed the lists as individual lines into it.
To do this in Tcl, assuming there's not huge amounts of data (a few MB wouldn't be “huge”) the easiest way would be:
# Read the values in from stdin, break into lists of lists
foreach line [split [read stdin] "\n"] {
lappend records [split $line ","]
}
# Sort twice, first by secondary key then by primary (lsort is _stable_)
set records [lsort -index 1 -real $records]
set records [lsort -index 0 -real $records]
# Write the values back out to stdout
foreach record $records {
puts [join $record ","]
}
If you're using anything more complex than simple numbers, consider using the csv package in Tcllib for parsing and formatting, as it will deal with many syntactic issues that crop up in Real Data. If you're dealing with a lot of data (where “lot” depends on how much memory you deploy with) then consider using a more stream-oriented method for handling the data (and there are a few other optimizations in the memory handling) and you might also want to use the -command option to lsort to supply a custom comparator so you can sort only once; the performance hit of a custom comparator is quite high, alas, but for many records the reduced number of comparisons will win out. Or shove the data into a database like SQLite or Postgres.
You can use STL's sort, and then all you have to do is to write a comparison function that does what you want (the example in the link should be good enough).
Since you asked for a Tcl solution:
set lol {
{2 4 7 4 9 5}
{4 3 7.3 9 8 1.2}
{2 2.4 7 9 8 5}
{9 1.6 4 3 4 1}
{2 5 7 9 1 4}
{6 8 7 2 1 5}
{4 2 5 2 1 3}
}
set ::EPS 10e-6
proc compareLists {ixo e1 e2} {
foreach ix $ixo {
set d [expr {[lindex $e1 $ix] - [lindex $e2 $ix]}]
if {abs($d) > $::EPS} {
return [expr {($d>0)-($d<0)}]
}
}
return 0
}
foreach li [lsort -command [list compareLists {0 2 1}] $lol] {
puts $li
}
Hope that helps.
Here is a C++ solution:
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include <algorithm>
template <typename Array, typename CompareOrderIndex>
struct arrayCompare
{
private:
size_t
size ;
CompareOrderIndex
index ;
public:
arrayCompare( CompareOrderIndex idx ) : size( idx.size() ), index(idx) { }
bool helper( const Array &a1, const Array &a2, unsigned int num ) const
{
if( a1[ index[size-num] ] > a2[ index[size-num] ] )
{
return false ;
}
if( !(a1[ index[size-num] ] < a2[ index[size-num] ]) )
{
if( 1 != num )
{
return helper( a1, a2, num-1 ) ;
}
}
return true ;
}
bool operator()( const Array &a1, const Array &a2 ) const
{
return helper( a1, a2, size ) ;
}
} ;
int main()
{
std::vector< std::vector<float> > lists = { { 2, 4, 7, 4, 9, 5},
{ 4, 3, 7.3, 9, 8, 1.2 },
{ 2, 2.4, 7, 9, 8, 5 },
{ 4, 2, 5, 2, 1, 3 },
{ 9, 1.6, 4, 3, 4, 1 },
{ 2, 5, 7, 9, 1, 4 },
{ 6, 8, 7, 2, 1, 5 },
{ 4, 2, 5, 2, 1, 1 },
};
//
// Specify the column indexes to compare and the order to compare.
// In this case it will first compare column 1 then 3 and finally 2.
//
//std::vector<int> indexOrder = { 0, 2, 1, 3, 4 ,5 } ;
std::vector<int> indexOrder = { 0, 2, 1 } ;
arrayCompare< std::vector<float>, std::vector<int>> compV( indexOrder ) ;
std::sort( lists.begin(), lists.end(), arrayCompare< std::vector<float>, std::vector<int>>( indexOrder ) ) ;
for(auto p: lists)
{
for( unsigned int i = 0; i < p.size(); ++i )
{
unsigned int idx = ( i > (indexOrder.size() -1) ? i : indexOrder[i] ) ;
std::cout << p[idx] << ", " ;
}
std::cout << std::endl ;
}
}