Chronological Ordering of appointments #161
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
khoongwk
requested review from
RuiFengg,
yanlynnnnn,
galvinleow and
hanstirtaputra
|
@yanlynnnnn @galvinleow Can refer to my implementation so that yall can apply to revenue and expenses too. |
khoongwk
changed the title
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Implementation details: When appointments are added or edited, the
addmethod orsetItemmethod in UniqueList is called. I extended UniqueList to override these methods such that they are sorted by the comparator every time a change is made. This is a workaround as there is no convenient PriorityQueue available from FXCollections.Also, I changed
getAppointmentList()in AppointmentManager.java such that theinternalListis returned rather than theinternalUnmodifiableList. This is inevitable as we cannot sort unmodifiable lists. Not sure what are the implications of this, seems fine at the moment (maybe can ask Jeffry).