• 0

C# and making a TreeView out of arrays


Question

So I have encountered a probleem while trying to populate a TreeView control with nodes. I hope that there are a some kind people who t?ke the time and help me figuure out a correct solution.

So lets say I have 3 arrays:

 

["Example", "2", "1"]

{"Example", "2", "2"]

["Example", "3", "0"]

 

I know that my arrays have always exactly 3 elements in them, so the treeview will never have more than 3 childnodes

 

But all I am able to get is

 

Example

 2

  1

Example

 2

  2

Example

 3

  0

 

But the goal would be:

 

Example

 2

  1

  2

 3

  0

 

So where would I start chasing down the answer to my probleem?
Big thanks in advance :)

 

 

Recommended Posts

  • 0


void InitTreeView(List<string[]> arrays) {

            foreach (var array in arrays) {

                AddArray(array, 0, m_treeView.Nodes);

            }

        }

        /// <summary>

        /// Recursively adds each element of the array to the tree

        /// </summary>

        void AddArray(string[] array, int index, TreeNodeCollection nodes) {

            // Termination condition: we've past the bounds of the array

            if (index < array.Length) {

                var nextNode = AddValue(array[index], nodes);

                AddArray(array, index + 1, nextNode.Nodes);

            }

        }

        /// <summary>

        /// If the value exists, returns it, otherwise creates a new value

        /// </summary>

        TreeNode AddValue(string value, TreeNodeCollection nodes) {

            var index = nodes.IndexOfKey(value);

            if (index == -1) {

                var newNode = new TreeNode(value) { Name = value };

                nodes.Add(newNode);

                return newNode;

            }

            return nodes[index];

        }

  • 0

        private static TreeView GetTree(TreeView Tree, List<string[]> Items)
        {
            foreach (string[] item in Items)
            {
                TreeNode parent = new TreeNode();
                parent.Text = item[0];
                TreeNode child = new TreeNode();
                child.Text = item[1];
                TreeNode child2 = new TreeNode();
                child2.Text = item[2];
                child.Nodes.Add(child2);
                parent.Nodes.Add(child);
                Tree.Nodes.Add(parent);
            }
            return Tree;
        }

Well, I have a code  that goes through each array and creates parentnode with array first item, childnode with second and childnode of childnode with third. So thats pretty basic approach

 

  • 0

I imagine you want to do something like the following pseudo code.
Idea is that you create the array of children you want before you create the treenode with the label.

tv = new TreeView();
dict = new Dictionary<String, List<String>>();
arrs = array of those arrays;

for arr in arrs:
     dict[arr[1]].Add(arr[2]);

for (key, value) in dict:
    tv.Nodes.Add(new TreeNode(key, value.ToArray()))
  • 0
  On 22/12/2013 at 14:17, Lant said:

 

I imagine you want to do something like the following pseudo code.

Idea is that you create the array of children you want before you create the treenode with the label.

 

 

Got lost trying to implement something like that, although the approach is right, I need to create the last level nodes first

  • 0

What sort of performance are you looking for?  If you're just talking a few hundred items, then try this approach.

 

Each node should be identifiable via a predictable, unique key of your creation (it could be, literally, the value you're trying to insert).  Try to find your parent node by looking for the key it should have.  If you can't find it, create a new node and insert it.  If it returns something instead, then use that as the parent of the key you're trying to insert.

  • 0
  On 22/12/2013 at 16:55, jakem1 said:

Try a recursive function.

This is the right way to go, I know that, but I am totally unsure how the code should look like.

Regarding to performance, it is important in my case since we're talking about thousands of nodes here.

  • 0
  On 22/12/2013 at 17:01, ka-la said:

This is the right way to go, I know that, but I am totally unsure how the code should look like.

Regarding to performance, it is important in my case since we're talking about thousands of nodes here.

 

As a general rule of thumb, if you find yourself pushing program state into some sort of explicit stack when using an iterative solution (pushing state to a queue for example): you are may just be doing an explicit recursion (what I mean by this is that you are doing the same work that a recursion would do for you) and are may be better suited to just use a recursive solution.

  • 0

This should be very straightforward to convert to C#, but here's the general idea for a recursive solution:

InitTreeView:
    var data = new List<string[]> { " Your data here " };
    foreach array in data:
        AddArray(array, 0, root collection)

AddArray(array, index, nodes):
    // Termination condition: index is past the end of the array
    // Otherwise:
    nextNode = AddValue(array[index], nodes)
    AddArray(array, index + 1, nextNode collection)

AddValue(value, nodes):
    // If node exists in the collection, return it
    // Otherwise create new node with the value, add it and return it
  • 0
  On 26/12/2013 at 17:08, Andre S. said:

 

This should be very straightforward to convert to C#, but here's the general idea for a recursive solution:


InitTreeView:
    var data = new List<string[]> { " Your data here " };
    foreach array in data:
        AddArray(array, 0, root collection)

AddArray(array, index, nodes):
    // Termination condition: index is past the end of the array
    // Otherwise:
    nextNode = AddValue(array[index], nodes)
    AddArray(array[index], index + 1, nextNode collection)

AddValue(value, nodes):
    // If node exists in the collection, return it
    // Otherwise create new node with the value, add it and return it

Some parts of the code still remain as a puzzle for me:

1)  What should AddValue return, a collection or a treenode?

2) AddArray( array[index].... seems weird to me, it expects an array, but your code sends it a value from array with that index

3) What should AddArray return? my best guess so far is, it is just a void and does not return anything.

4) nextNode collection should be nextNode.Nodes ? (case the AddValue returns a treenode)

  • 0
  On 27/12/2013 at 15:08, ka-la said:

Some parts of the code still remain as a puzzle for me:

1)  What should AddValue return, a collection or a treenode?

2) AddArray( array[index].... seems weird to me, it expects an array, but your code sends it a value from array with that index

3) What should AddArray return? my best guess so far is, it is just a void and does not return anything.

4) nextNode collection should be nextNode.Nodes ? (case the AddValue returns a treenode)

1) As I wrote it, it returns a TreeNode. You could just return the collection as well as that's the only thing AddArray needs.

2) Oops that was a mistake, fixed. Should pass array.

3) AddArray is void.

4) Yup.

 

Is this homework?

  • 0
        private static TreeView GetTree(TreeView Tree)
        {
            Tree.BeginUpdate();
            List<string[]> l_tree = new List<string[]>();
            string[] str1 = new string[] {"Example", "2", "1"};
            string[] str2 = new string[] { "Example", "2", "2"};
            string[] str3 = new string[] { "Example", "3", "0" };
            l_tree.Add(str1);
            l_tree.Add(str2);
            l_tree.Add(str3);

            foreach (string[] array in l_tree)
            {
                AddArray(array, 0, Tree.Nodes);
            }
            Tree.EndUpdate();
            return Tree;
        }

        private static void AddArray(string[] array, int index, TreeNodeCollection nodes)
        {
            if (index < 3)
            {
                var nextNode = AddValue(array[index], nodes);
                AddArray(array, index + 1, nextNode.Nodes);
            }
        }

        private static TreeNode AddValue(string value, TreeNodeCollection nodes)
        {
            if (nodes.Count == 0)
            {
                TreeNode newnode = new TreeNode();
                newnode.Text = value;
                nodes.Add(newnode);
                return newnode;
            }
            else
            {
                foreach (TreeNode node in nodes)
                {
                    if (node.Text == value)
                    {
                        return node;
                    }
                    else
                    {
                        TreeNode newnode = new TreeNode();
                        newnode.Text = value;
                        node.Nodes.Add(newnode);
                        return node;
                    }
                }
            }
            return null;
        }

If the initial tree is empty, I get nullreferenceexception, since I cant go through the empty collection in addvalue

Example

 2

  1

    2

    0

  3

 

 

  • 0
  On 27/12/2013 at 22:59, ka-la said:

Sir I am truly thankful for your help, not sure how to return the regards :)

Glad to be of help. :) By the way, you can write this:

    List<string[]> l_tree = new List<string[]>();
    string[] str1 = new string[] {"Example", "2", "1"};
    string[] str2 = new string[] { "Example", "2", "2"};
    string[] str3 = new string[] { "Example", "3", "0" };
    l_tree.Add(str1);
    l_tree.Add(str2);
    l_tree.Add(str3);

more simply as:

    var l_tree = new List<string[]> {
        new[] { "Example", "2", "1" },
        new[] { "Example", "2", "2" },
        new[] { "Example", "3", "0" }
    }
  • 0

I haven't tested but are you required to use the new[] syntax for the string arrays(i.e. string[]) in this example or can you get away with removing that part because of the string type?

  • 0
  On 28/12/2013 at 02:56, snaphat (Myles Landwehr) said:

I haven't tested but are you required to use the new[] syntax for the string arrays(i.e. string[]) in this example or can you get away with removing that part because of the string type?

new[] { "a", "b" }

 is shorthand (since C# 3.0) for :

new string[] { "a", "b" }

There's also a special case (which was just to copy C/C++ in C# 1.0) for assignment to a new variable, where you can omit everything:

string[] array = { "a", "b" }

But then you have to explicitely type the variable, you can't use var. IMO this is old fashioned and for consistency everyone should write:

var array = new[] { "a", "b" }

Of course this works for all types and not just string.

  • 0
  On 28/12/2013 at 03:12, Andre S. said:
new[] { "a", "b" }

 is shorthand (since C# 3.0) for :

new string[] { "a", "b" }

There's also a special case (which was just to copy C/C++ in C# 1.0) for assignment to a new variable, where you can omit everything:

string[] array = { "a", "b" }

But then you have to explicitely type the variable, you can't use var. IMO this is old fashioned and for consistency everyone should write:

var array = new[] { "a", "b" }

Of course this works for all types and not just string.

 

 

Right, right, Is the special case for assignment still possible in newer C# revisions or is is not-recommended/depreciated? I initially thought that you were being a bit more verbose with the new[] statement in the compound list assignment because it was required. Sounds like you were doing it more for consistencies sake; which is fair.

  • 0
  On 28/12/2013 at 03:28, snaphat (Myles Landwehr) said:

Right, right, Is the special case for assignment still possible in newer C# revisions or is is not-recommended/depreciated? I initially thought that you were being a bit more verbose with the new[] statement in the compound list assignment because it was required. Sounds like you were doing it more for consistencies sake; which is fair.

I'm doing it in the list assignment because it is and has always been required in that case. You can omit new[] only if you assign the array expression to an explicitely typed variable. This, in addition to the fact that this syntax contradicts the usual C# principle that every expression has a type, makes it inconsistent and confusing in my eyes, but it's still supported. It's only my opinion and not any sort of official deprecation or recommendation.

  • Like 1
  • 0
  On 28/12/2013 at 03:56, Andre S. said:

I'm doing it in the list assignment because it is and has always been required in that case. You can omit new[] only if you assign the array expression to an explicitely typed variable. This, in addition to the fact that this syntax contradicts the usual C# principle that every expression has a type, makes it inconsistent and confusing in my eyes, but it's still supported. It's only my opinion and not any sort of official deprecation or recommendation.

 

Fair enough, I'll say that the bolded text is a good reason to use it in the above code regardless of opinion ;-)

  • 0
  On 28/12/2013 at 04:09, snaphat (Myles Landwehr) said:

Fair enough, I'll say that the bolded text is a good reason to use it in the above code regardless of opinion ;-)

I'm not sure if we're talking past each other... this:

new List<string[]> {
     { "a", "b", "c" },
     { "b", "c", "d" }
}

is not and never was legal C#.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Windows 11 blocks Google Chrome due to a Microsoft safety feature, fix out by Sayan Sen Microsoft has a parental control and safety feature called "Microsoft Family Safety" which allows users to create safe spaces for their family members for browsing the web by setting up filters so as to block and filter inappropriate content and limit browsing to kid-friendly and family friendly content. However, as it turns out, following Chrome version updates 137.0.7151.68, 137.0.7151.69, Google's web browser is getting automatically blocked by Microsoft Family Safety as affected users have reported that the browser will automatically close or crash and then fail to reopen. Thus if you are using Edge, you get the green signal from the Family Safety app, but not if you are using Google Chrome. The issue seems to be affecting mainly Windows 11 devices but Windows 10 or macOS may be affected too. A thread on Microsoft's official Windows forum by Peter Priestley1, which is presumably from an educational institute, says: The thread has been upvoted by 122 people at the time of writing. There are plenty of other such threads online and users also say that they have tried all sorts of things like refreshing cookies and appdata but "nothing" seems to fix it. This shows that Microsoft's safety feature is certainly robust and that it is not easy to bypass but it also means affected users are not too happy about it considering it is seemingly blocking all versions of Chrome. There is one fix that worked though, renaming chrome.exe to something else like chrome1.exe for example. A Chrome community manager, Ellen T, has confirmed that the Microsoft feature is indeed what is causing it and the only way to fix the issue is to "unblock Chrome" inside the Family Safety app. Ellen says: Microsoft has also shared a similar guidance on the issue according to Fred SR., a senior member of the Chrome community.
    • Typical Microsoft... Go half way and then lazily stop. As if adding all the other directional options would have been so difficult...
    • Some of these robots are getting pretty human-like, but obviously stronger and more bendy. Weight and balance is probably a big hurdle because of all the batteries they have to pack in them, but it'll continue to improve. I'm guessing these companies foresee a future where every household has a robot slave...I mean, assistant.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Helen Shafer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • First Post
      emptyother earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Crunchy6 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      KynanSEIT earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      gowtham07 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      660
    2. 2
      ATLien_0
      270
    3. 3
      Michael Scrip
      218
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      162
    5. 5
      +FloatingFatMan
      159
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!