/// <summary>
/// Calling vwenv.AddObjVec() in Display() and implementing DisplayVec() seems to
/// work better than calling vwenv.AddObjVecItems() in Display(). Theoretically
/// this should not be case, but experience trumps theory every time. :-) :-(
/// </summary>
public override void DisplayVec(IVwEnv vwenv, int hvo, int tag, int frag)
{
ISilDataAccess da = vwenv.DataAccess;
int count = da.get_VecSize(hvo, tag);
for (int i = 0; i < count; ++i)
{
vwenv.AddObj(da.get_VecItem(hvo, tag, i), this,
VectorReferenceView.kfragTargetObj);
vwenv.AddSeparatorBar();
}
}
/// <summary>
/// Calling vwenv.AddObjVec() in Display() and implementing DisplayVec() seems to
/// work better than calling vwenv.AddObjVecItems() in Display(). Theoretically
/// this should not be case, but experience trumps theory every time. :-) :-(
/// </summary>
public override void DisplayVec(IVwEnv vwenv, int hvo, int tag, int frag)
{
ISilDataAccess da = vwenv.DataAccess;
int count = da.get_VecSize(hvo, tag);
// Tree Branches consist of everything FOLLOWING the first element which is the Tree root.
for (int i = 1; i < count; ++i)
{
vwenv.AddObj(da.get_VecItem(hvo, tag, i), this,
VectorReferenceView.kfragTargetObj);
vwenv.AddSeparatorBar();
}
}
/// <summary>
/// Calling vwenv.AddObjVec() in Display() and implementing DisplayVec() seems to
/// work better than calling vwenv.AddObjVecItems() in Display(). Theoretically
/// this should not be case, but experience trumps theory every time. :-) :-(
/// </summary>
public override void DisplayVec(IVwEnv vwenv, int hvo, int tag, int frag)
{
ISilDataAccess da = vwenv.DataAccess;
int count = da.get_VecSize(hvo, tag);
// Show everything in the sequence including current element from the main display.
for (int i = 0; i < count; ++i)
{
int hvoItem = da.get_VecItem(hvo, tag, i);
vwenv.AddObj(hvoItem, this, VectorReferenceView.kfragTargetObj);
vwenv.AddSeparatorBar();
}
}
/// <summary>
/// Calling vwenv.AddObjVec() in Display() and implementing DisplayVec() seems to
/// work better than calling vwenv.AddObjVecItems() in Display(). Theoretically
/// this should not be case, but experience trumps theory every time. :-) :-(
/// </summary>
public override void DisplayVec(IVwEnv vwenv, int hvo, int tag, int frag)
{
CheckDisposed();
ISilDataAccess da = vwenv.DataAccess;
int count = da.get_VecSize(hvo, tag);
// Tree Branches consist of everything FOLLOWING the first element which is the Tree root.
for (int i = 1; i < count; ++i)
{
vwenv.AddObj(da.get_VecItem(hvo, tag, i), this,
VectorReferenceView.kfragTargetObj);
vwenv.AddSeparatorBar();
}
}
public override void DisplayVec(IVwEnv vwenv, int hvo, int tag, int frag)
{
CheckDisposed();
ISilDataAccess da = vwenv.DataAccess;
int count = da.get_VecSize(hvo, tag);
for (int i = 0; i < count; ++i)
{
if (i != 0)
{
vwenv.AddSeparatorBar();
}
vwenv.AddObj(da.get_VecItem(hvo, tag, i), this,
PhoneEnvReferenceView.kFragEnvironmentObj);
}
}
/// <summary>
/// Calling vwenv.AddObjVec() in Display() and implementing DisplayVec() seems to
/// work better than calling vwenv.AddObjVecItems() in Display(). Theoretically
/// this should not be case, but experience trumps theory every time. :-) :-(
/// </summary>
public override void DisplayVec(IVwEnv vwenv, int hvo, int tag, int frag)
{
ISilDataAccess da = vwenv.DataAccess;
int count = da.get_VecSize(hvo, tag);
// Show everything in the collection except the current element from the main display.
for (int i = 0; i < count; ++i)
{
int hvoItem = da.get_VecItem(hvo, tag, i);
if (m_displayParent != null && hvoItem == m_displayParent.Hvo)
{
continue;
}
vwenv.AddObj(hvoItem, this, VectorReferenceView.kfragTargetObj);
vwenv.AddSeparatorBar();
}
}
public override void DisplayVec(IVwEnv vwenv, int hvo, int tag, int frag)
{
CheckDisposed();
ISilDataAccess da = vwenv.DataAccess;
int count = da.get_VecSize(hvo, tag);
for (int i = 0; i < count; ++i)
{
if (i != 0)
vwenv.AddSeparatorBar();
vwenv.AddObj(da.get_VecItem(hvo, tag, i), this,
PhoneEnvReferenceView.kFragEnvironmentObj);
}
}
public override void DisplayVec(IVwEnv vwenv, int hvo, int tag, int frag)
{
CheckDisposed();
ISilDataAccess da = vwenv.DataAccess;
switch (frag)
{
default:
{
Debug.Assert(false, "Unrecognized fragment.");
break;
}
case ReversalIndexEntrySliceView.kFragIndices:
{
// hvo here is the sense.
int countRows = da.get_VecSize(hvo, tag);
Debug.Assert(countRows == m_usedIndices.Count, "Mismatched number of indices.");
for (int i = 0; i < countRows; ++i)
{
vwenv.OpenTableRow();
int idxHvo = da.get_VecItem(hvo, tag, i);
vwenv.AddObj(idxHvo, this, ReversalIndexEntrySliceView.kFragIndexMain);
vwenv.CloseTableRow();
}
break;
}
case ReversalIndexEntrySliceView.kFragEntries:
{
int wsHvo = 0;
foreach (IReversalIndex idx in m_usedIndices)
{
if (idx.Hvo == hvo)
{
wsHvo = idx.WritingSystemRAHvo;
break;
}
}
Debug.Assert(wsHvo > 0, "Could not find writing system.");
int wsOldDefault = this.DefaultWs;
this.DefaultWs = wsHvo;
// hvo here is a reversal index.
int countEntries = da.get_VecSize(hvo, ReversalIndexEntrySliceView.kFlidEntries);
for (int j = 0; j < countEntries; ++j)
{
if (j != 0)
vwenv.AddSeparatorBar();
int entryHvo = da.get_VecItem(hvo, ReversalIndexEntrySliceView.kFlidEntries, j);
vwenv.AddObj(entryHvo, this, ReversalIndexEntrySliceView.kFragEntryForm);
}
this.DefaultWs = wsOldDefault;
break;
}
}
}
/// <summary>
/// Calling vwenv.AddObjVec() in Display() and implementing DisplayVec() seems to
/// work better than calling vwenv.AddObjVecItems() in Display(). Theoretically
/// this should not be case, but experience trumps theory every time. :-) :-(
/// </summary>
public override void DisplayVec(IVwEnv vwenv, int hvo, int tag, int frag)
{
ISilDataAccess da = vwenv.DataAccess;
int count = da.get_VecSize(hvo, tag);
// Show everything in the collection except the current element from the main display.
for (int i = 0; i < count; ++i)
{
int hvoItem = da.get_VecItem(hvo, tag, i);
if (m_displayParent != null && hvoItem == m_displayParent.Hvo)
continue;
vwenv.AddObj(hvoItem, this, VectorReferenceView.kfragTargetObj);
vwenv.AddSeparatorBar();
}
}
/// <summary>
/// Calling vwenv.AddObjVec() in Display() and implementing DisplayVec() seems to
/// work better than calling vwenv.AddObjVecItems() in Display(). Theoretically
/// this should not be case, but experience trumps theory every time. :-) :-(
/// </summary>
public override void DisplayVec(IVwEnv vwenv, int hvo, int tag, int frag)
{
ISilDataAccess da = vwenv.DataAccess;
int count = da.get_VecSize(hvo, tag);
for (int i = 0; i < count; ++i)
{
vwenv.AddObj(da.get_VecItem(hvo, tag, i), this,
VectorReferenceView.kfragTargetObj);
vwenv.AddSeparatorBar();
}
}
/// <summary>
/// Calling vwenv.AddObjVec() in Display() and implementing DisplayVec() seems to
/// work better than calling vwenv.AddObjVecItems() in Display(). Theoretically
/// this should not be case, but experience trumps theory every time. :-) :-(
/// </summary>
public override void DisplayVec(IVwEnv vwenv, int hvo, int tag, int frag)
{
ISilDataAccess da = vwenv.DataAccess;
int count = da.get_VecSize(hvo, tag);
// Show everything in the sequence including current element from the main display.
for (int i = 0; i < count; ++i)
{
int hvoItem = da.get_VecItem(hvo, tag, i);
vwenv.AddObj(hvoItem, this, VectorReferenceView.kfragTargetObj);
vwenv.AddSeparatorBar();
}
}