enable array-based API

[GoogleCodeExporter]

perhaps columnArray() tableArray() or something.

This will enable an API for end users, e.g. 
   columnB = [x + 1 for x in columnA]

or find duplicates
   [x for x in columnA for y in columnA if x == y]
or whatever the code is. Much better than Excel scripts.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by chris.f....@gmail.com on 2 Oct 2008 at 6:42

[GoogleCodeExporter]

what do I want
*       easy array getters / setters for the table, rows, and columns

table.values() - returns [row][column]
table.column("xyz").values() - returns [row]
table.row("xyz").values() - returns [column]

but what is "xyz", how do you refer to them?
* by number e.g. table.column(1).values() and table.row(2).values()
* by the content in the column / row header. e.g. <th>Heading2</th> would allow
table.column("Heading2").values(). This would rely on a header row and header 
cell in
the first cell of the row.

you could do setters using

table.column("xyz").values([a,b,c]) which would overwrite the first three cells 
in
the column (leaving the others intact)

what would this enable?
table.addColumn().values([i + 1 for i in table.column("old")])

Original comment by chris.f....@gmail.com on 3 Oct 2008 at 10:06

[GoogleCodeExporter]

however this wouldn't enable binding. perhaps I should add an entirely 
symmetrical
function, .bind().

So: table.addColumn().bind([i+1 for i in table.column("old")]);

which would update the new column whenever the "old" column changed its values.

Original comment by chris.f....@gmail.com on 3 Oct 2008 at 10:08

[GoogleCodeExporter]

no, we've got to make it entirely functional from the start.

so we can't have separate bind() functions, binding is "assumed" from the 
values()
function. 

Original comment by chris.f....@gmail.com on 3 Oct 2008 at 10:10

[GoogleCodeExporter]

But surely binding should be implemented for ANY html element, not just table 
ones?
So this should probably be a new library. For example, you can imagine binding 
a set
of <li> elements to another set of <li> elements, this should be allowed using 
the
.values() syntax as well.

Original comment by chris.f....@gmail.com on 4 Oct 2008 at 9:48