Java Development Tools

Announcement

For appeals, questions and feedback about Oracle Forums, please email oracle-forums-moderators_us@oracle.com. Technical questions should be asked in the appropriate category. Thank you!

Dynamic Task Flow with Parameters

Ghazi HakimJan 2 2014 — edited Jan 3 2014

Hello,

I have a dynamic task flow in my page and I used this code and it's working :

jsff :

<af:region value="#{bindings.dynamicTF.regionModel}" id="r1"/>

pageDef :

<taskFlow id="dynamicTF" taskFlowId="#{pageFlowScope.myBean.dynamicTaskFlowId}" activation="deferred"

xmlns="http://xmlns.oracle.com/adf/controller/binding"/>

Bean :

public TaskFlowId getDynamicTaskFlowId() {

ControllerContext context = ControllerContext.getInstance();

ViewPortContext currentRootViewPort = context.getCurrentRootViewPort();

Exception exceptionData = currentRootViewPort.getExceptionData();

if (currentRootViewPort.isExceptionPresent()) {

exceptionData.printStackTrace();

currentRootViewPort.clearException();

FacesContext facesContext = FacesContext.getCurrentInstance();

facesContext.addMessage(null, new FacesMessage(FacesMessage.SEVERITY_ERROR, exceptionData.getMessage(), null));

return TaskFlowId.parse(taskFlowId);

}

return TaskFlowId.parse(taskFlowId);

}

The problem is when the task flow needs parameters, I need to pass those parameters programmatically, how can I do that ?

Thank you.

thatJeffSmith-Oracle

Step 1, go get version 19.4, b/c the formatter has several improvements in the areas of proper alignment already, so that's a better baseline

Vadim Tropashko-Oracle

1. Comments (and hints) are filtered away by parser, and are consequently ignored by formatter. To be able to process them with Custom Format, the input text must be made accessible as java object in Nashorn. I made this amendment to 20.1 as per your earlier request to be able to update the formatting timestamp. Then, a hint can be recognized in the input and, consequently, new line can be appended. However you would likely want to indent the first column with the others -- this doesn't look easy at the moment.

2. You have disabled double breaks after statements in the Advanced Options, but you need to enable them back to make the rule brkX2 working. If you don't need double line breaks under the certain conditions, then you just remove those disjuncts. Assuming you don't want any of them, here is the amended rule:

brkX2:

--brkX2_1 | brkX2_2

[node) basic_decl_item_list & [node+1) full_cursor_body

->;

The formatted output:

DECLARE

c_defaultbsstrno CONSTANT store.str_no%TYPE := 0;

CURSOR l_rtltndrdtlcur IS

SELECT *

 FROM dual;

CURSOR l_rtltndrdtlcur IS

SELECT *

 FROM dual;

BEGIN

NULL;

END;

simpleIndentConditions:

...

| [node) privilege_audit_clause

--| [node) parm_list_opt & [node^) fml_part

--| [node) prm_spec & [node^) fml_part

--| [node) query_partition_clause --& [node^) analytic_clause

...

_paddedIdsInScope1: (

-- types

:alignTypeDecl & [id) identifier & [id+1) datatype & [scope) relational_properties

--| :alignTypeDecl & ( :breaksAfterComma | :breaksBeforeComma ) & [id) decl_id & ([id+1) prm_spec_unconstrained_type | [id+1) mode /*30067569:*/| [id+1) 'OUT' | [id+1) 'IN' ) & [scope) fml_part

| :alignTypeDecl & ( :breaksAfterComma | :breaksBeforeComma ) & [id) decl_id & ([id+1) constrained_type | [id+1) object_d_rhs) & [scope) adt_definition

...

_extraBrkBefore:

...

| :breaksBeforeComma & [node+1) field & [node) ','

--| :breaksBeforeComma & [node+1) prm_spec & [node) ','

| :breaksBeforeComma & [node+1) XML_attributes_clause & [node) ','

...

Output:

CREATE OR REPLACE PACKAGE BODY emp_mgmt AS

tot_emps NUMBER;

tot_depts NUMBER;

FUNCTION hire (last_name VARCHAR2,job_id VARCHAR2,manager_id NUMBER,salary NUMBER,department_id NUMBER) RETURN NUMBER IS

  new\_empno NUMBER;

BEGIN

...

format advanced.png

simpleIndentConditions:

...

| [node) alter_method_spec

--| [node) and_expr & ![node) rel

| .breaksProcArgs & [node) arg & [node^) paren_expr_list & [node+1) arg_list

...

_extraBrkBefore:

[node) 'AND' & [node+1) arith_expr |

[node) physical_properties

...

Output:

BEGIN

  IF (l\_prevstrno = l\_tndrcrctnchgrec.str\_no)

  AND (l\_prevtrmlno = l\_tndrcrctnchgrec.trml\_no)

  AND (l\_prevtxno = l\_tndrcrctnchgrec.tx\_no)

  AND (l\_prevtxdte = l\_tndrcrctnchgrec.tx\_dte)

  AND (l\_prevtrmltypcd = l\_tndrcrctnchgrec.trml\_typ\_cd)

  AND (l\_prevrundte = l\_tndrcrctnchgrec.run\_dte)

  THEN ilevel := 'Low Income';

P.S. Tested everything in 19.4, not 19.2.

1 person found this helpful

Dilly1990

Thanks Vadim for your code snippets.

After migrating to 19.4, I was able to break lines and align code as needed.

However on few instance I'm unable to align the code.

Can you please help me on the following requirement,

SQL and SQL within the PL/SQL:

On the CASE_EXPRESSION both CASE and END need to be aligned on the same column.

 SEARCHED\_CASE\_EXPRESSION AND ELSE\_CLAUSE  need to be indent within the case statement.

Indent ON_USING_CONDITION next to JOIN_CLAUSE.

SELECT rtd.col1

  ,rtd.col2

  ,**CASE**

WHEN rtd.col1 = 'Y' THEN (rtd.col1 / 100) * - 1

ELSE (rtd.col1 / 100) * 1

END AS prod_prc

  ,t99.col1

  ,TRUNC (SYSDATE) AS run\_dte

FROM table1 rtd

JOIN table2 t99

ON rtd.str_no = t99.str_no

AND CASE

WHEN rtd.col1 = 'N' THEN rtd.col1 * - 1

ELSE rtd.col1 / 100 * 1

END = rtd.extd_prc

AND CASE

WHEN rtd.can_key_fg = 'N' THEN 'A'

ELSE 'V'

END = t99.void_fg

JOIN table2 t98

ON rtd.str_no = t98.str_no

WHERE t99.run_dte BETWEEN p_runDte AND p_runDte + 1;

Expected:

1 person found this helpful

Vadim Tropashko-Oracle

1. Advanced Format -> Line Breaks -> IF/CASE/WHILE = Terse (line breaks only after actions)

2. Custom Format:

simpleIndentConditions:

...

| [node) case_expression & ![node) select_term & ![node^) "aliased_expr" & ![node^) comparison_condition

...

| [node) on_using_condition

...

pairwiseAlignments1: predecessor = node-1 & (

[predecessor) group_by_list[5,12) & [node) ','

| [predecessor) order_by_clause[31,38) & [node) ','

| [predecessor) select_list & [node) ','

| [predecessor) cartesian_product & [node) ','

| [predecessor) merge_insert_clause[26,33) & [node) ','

| [predecessor) column & [node) merge_insert_clause[26,33)

| [predecessor) "expr_list_def"[16,34) & [node) ','

| [predecessor) "expr_list" & [node) ',' -- leading commas

| [predecessor) column & [node) "expr_list_def"[16,34)

| [predecessor) merge_update_clause[36,56) & [node) ','

| !:alignRight & [predecessor) condition & [node) AND_OR

| [predecessor) expr & [node) compound_expression[25,44)

| [predecessor) '>' & [node) expr & [node^) arg

| [predecessor) arith_expr & [node) binary_add_op

| [predecessor) 'CASE' & [node) searched_case_expression

);

pairwiseAlignments2: predecessor=node-1-1 & (

[predecessor) select_list & [node) select_term & [node-1) ','

| [predecessor) cartesian_product & [node) table_reference & [node-1) ','

| [predecessor) condition & [node) condition & [node-1) AND_OR

| [predecessor) adt_field_list & [node) adt_field & [node-1) ','

| [predecessor) adt_field & [node) adt_field & [node-1) ','

| [predecessor) "expr_list" & [node) expr & [node-1) ','

| [predecessor) expr & [node) expr

| !:breakOnSubqueries & [predecessor) '(' & [node) ')' & [node-1) query_block & ![node^) par_subquery

| [predecessor) 'CASE' & [node) 'END'

| [predecessor-1) 'CASE' & [node) 'END'

| [predecessor) 'CASE' & [node) else_clause

);

additional2Spaces:

[node) searched_case_expression

| [node) else_clause

-> { padNode(2) }

Output:

SELECT rtd.col1

,rtd.col2

,CASE

WHEN rtd.col1 = 'Y' THEN (rtd.col1 / 100) * - 1

ELSE (rtd.col1 / 100) * 1

END AS prod_prc

,t99.col1

,trunc (sysdate) AS run_dte

FROM table1 rtd

JOIN table2 t99

ON rtd.str_no = t99.str_no

AND CASE

WHEN rtd.col1 = 'N' THEN rtd.col1 * - 1

ELSE rtd.col1 / 100 * 1

END = rtd.extd_prc

AND CASE

WHEN rtd.can_key_fg = 'N' THEN 'A'

ELSE 'V'

END = t99.void_fg

JOIN table2 t98

ON rtd.str_no = t98.str_no

WHERE t99.run_dte BETWEEN p_rundte AND p_rundte + 1;

Dilly1990

Case and End are aligned, however when there are multiple WHEN's, first WHEN alignment goes slightly off.

Can you please help me on this.

SELECT rtd.col1

,rtd.col2

,CASE

WHEN rtd.col1 = 'N' THEN (rtd.col1 / 100) * - 1

WHEN rtd.col1 = 'Y' THEN (rtd.col1 / 100) * - 1

WHEN rtd.col1 != 'Y' THEN (rtd.col1 / 100) * - 1

ELSE (rtd.col1 / 100) * 1

END AS prod_prc

,t99.col1

,TRUNC (SYSDATE) AS run_dte

FROM table1 rtd;

Expected:

SELECT rtd.col1

,rtd.col2

,CASE

WHEN rtd.col1 = 'N' THEN (rtd.col1 / 100) * - 1

WHEN rtd.col1 = 'Y' THEN (rtd.col1 / 100) * - 1

WHEN rtd.col1 != 'Y' THEN (rtd.col1 / 100) * - 1

ELSE (rtd.col1 / 100) * 1

END AS prod_prc

,t99.col1

,TRUNC (SYSDATE) AS run_dte

FROM table1 rtd;

Dilly1990

-- https://community.oracle.com/thread/4202758

Another question about the pairwiseAlignments7_3, it aligns the merge_update_clause only when Line breaks on comma -> After.

Can you please let me know what changes are needed on the 7_3 to align merge_update_clause when Line breaks on comma -> Before.

MERGE INTO employees e

USING hr_records h ON (e.id = h.emp_id)

WHEN MATCHED THEN

UPDATE

SET e.address = h.address e.col1 = b.col1

,e.col2 = b.col2

,e.col3 = b.col3

Vadim Tropashko-Oracle

Thank you for the new test cases. Correction:

additional2Spaces:

[node) searched_case_expression#

| [node) else_clause

-> { padNode(2) }

Output:

SELECT rtd.col1

,rtd.col2

,CASE

WHEN rtd.col1 = 'N' THEN (rtd.col1 / 100) * - 1

WHEN rtd.col1 = 'Y' THEN (rtd.col1 / 100) * - 1

WHEN rtd.col1 != 'Y' THEN (rtd.col1 / 100) * - 1

ELSE (rtd.col1 / 100) * 1

END AS prod_prc

,t99.col1

,trunc (sysdate) AS run_dte

FROM table1 rtd;

Fixing merge statement format:

pairwiseAlignments9_1: -- https://community.oracle.com/thread/4310878

[predecessor) column

& [node) ',' & [node+1) column

& predecessor=ancestor-3

& ancestor < node

;

pairwiseAlignments:

...

| pairwiseAlignments9_1

...

;

less2Spaces: :breaksBeforeComma & (

[node+1) arg & [node) ','

| [node+1) prm_spec & [node) ','

| [node+1) select_term & [node) ','

| [node+1) group_by_col & [node) ','

| [node+1) "ord_by_1desc" & [node) ','

| [node+1) table_reference & [node) ','

| [node+1) par_expr_list[19,31) & [node) ',' -- in insert clause

| [node-1) "expr_list" & [node) ',' -- in insert clause

| [node^) query_partition_clause[14,21) & [node) ','

| [node+1) alias_in_out_constraints & [node) ','

| [node+1) column & [node+2) '=' & [node) ','

) -> {

var node = tuple.get("node");

var nodeIndent = struct.getNewline(node.from);

var offset = 2;

if( !struct.getBoolBind("spaceAfterCommas") )

offset = 1;

if( nodeIndent != null )

struct.putNewline(node.from, nodeIndent.substr(0,nodeIndent.length-offset));

}

Output:

MERGE INTO employees e

USING hr_records h ON (e.id = h.emp_id)

WHEN MATCHED THEN UPDATE

SET e.address = h.address

,e.col1 = b.col1

,e.col2 = b.col2

,e.col3 = b.col3

To remove indentation of the SET clause:

rightAlignments: :alignRight & (

...

| [node) 'SET' & ![node^) merge_update_clause

...

) ->

;

Dilly1990

HI Vadim,

I'm trying to format Analytic functions in both SQL and PL/SQL, looks like each function (SUM, RANK, COUNT) has different grammar rules.

is there a way to format the analytic function in similar way.

Input Sql:

SELECT ORDER_CD

  ,SUM (ORDERS)

OVER (

  PARTITION BY COL1,COL2,COL3

  ORDER BY DATE1

)

COL1

  ,RANK (UNITS\_ORDERED)

OVER (

PARTITION BY COL1,COL2,COL3

ORDER BY DATE1

) COL2

  ,COUNT (UNITS\_ORDERED)

    OVER (

       PARTITION BY COL1,COL2,COL3

       ORDER BY DATE1

    )

COL3

  ,UNITS\_ORDERED

FROM DUAL

Expected:

Thanks,

Dilly

Vadim Tropashko-Oracle

_extraBrkBefore:

...

| [node) order_by_clause

| [node) 'OVER'

...

pairwiseAlignments00: predecessor = node^^ & (

[predecessor) function & [node) 'OVER'

);

pairwiseAlignments0: predecessor = node^ & (

[predecessor) case_expression & [node) 'END'

| [predecessor) else_clause & [node) expr

| [predecessor) over_clause & [node) ')'

| [predecessor) function & [node) over_clause

| [predecessor) function & [node) 'OVER'

);

pairwiseAlignments1: predecessor = node-1 & (

...

| [predecessor) query_partition_clause & [node) order_by_clause

);

pairwiseAlignments30: predecessor=node-1-1-1 & (

[predecessor) 'OVER' & [node) ')'

);

pairwiseAlignments:

pairwiseAlignments00

| pairwiseAlignments0

| pairwiseAlignments1

| pairwiseAlignments2

| pairwiseAlignments30

| pairwiseAlignments3

...

Tested with

breaksAfterSelect=false

breaksComma=Before

commasPerLine=1

SELECT order_cd

, SUM(orders)

OVER(PARTITION BY col1

, col2

, col3

ORDER BY date1

) col1

, RANK(units_ordered)

OVER(PARTITION BY col1

, col2

, col3

ORDER BY date1

) col2

, COUNT(units_ordered)

OVER(PARTITION BY col1

, col2

, col3

ORDER BY date1

) col3

, units_ordered

FROM dual

jgebal

Vadim Tropashko-Oracle wrote:

Will the parser enhancements allow to distinguish between:

- single-line comments -- comment

- multi-line comments /* comment newline comment */

- single-line hint --+ hint

- multi-line hint /*+ hint newline hint */

The reason why I'm asking is that there is a significant behavioral impact if we don't do (remove) a newline after a single-line comment/hint

SELECT --+ INDEX(A)
     *
  FROM SOME_TABLE A
 WHERE ID = :X;

SELECT --+ INDEX(A) * 
  FROM SOME_TABLE A
 WHERE ID = :X;

The example 2 in above is not a valid SQL while below, both are valid.

SELECT /*+ INDEX(A) */
  *
FROM SOME_TABLE A
WHERE ID = :X;

SELECT /*+ INDEX(A) */ *
FROM SOME_TABLE A
WHERE ID = :X;

Taking this into consideration, some formatting could actually make code invalid if using single-line comments/hints

1 person found this helpful

1 - 10

Locked Post

New comments cannot be posted to this locked post.

Locked on Jan 31 2014

Added on Jan 2 2014

#adf, #application-development-in-java, #jdeveloper-and-adf, #region, #taskflow

2 comments

386 views

Java Development Tools

Dynamic Task Flow with Parameters

Comments

Post Details