Could someone tell me how I can find, within the executing Raku script itself, the path to the script?
I am looking for the equivalent of this Perl code in Raku:
$path=abs_path($0);
Use $*PROGRAM
see: https://docs.raku.org/language/variables#index-entry-$*PROGRAM
$*PROGRAM
Contains the location (in the form of an IO::Path object) of the Raku program being executed.
Related
In Pick BASIC source code I see lines such as
CALL SOMEPROGRAM (PARAM1, PARAM2)
How can I invoke that same line from the TCL command prompt? I've tried variations of the following but nothing seems to work.
SOMEPROGRAM ('1','2')
The only way I've found is to write and compile a program with the single line command and then run that program.
If this was your routine:
SUBROUTINE REALPROG(A,B)
PRINT "A is ":A
PRINT "B is ":B
END
To call it from command line, you'd build this routine:
PROGRAM WRAPPERPROG
COMMAND.RECEIVED = SENTENCE()
VAR1 = FIELD(COMMAND.RECEIVED,' ',2)
VAR2 = FIELD(COMMAND.RECEIVED,' ',3)
CALL REALPROG(VAR1, VAR2)
END
Assuming you typed this from the TCL/ECL command line:
WRAPPERPROG DOG CAT
VAR1 would be DOG and VAR2 would be CAT
...and would call REALPROG with those parameters and you should see
A is DOG
B is CAT
Tcl can invoke your overall program file as a subprocess using exec, but it is up to your program to turn that into a call to the program and processing of correct arguments.
The Tcl code to run the program will probably look something like this:
exec {*}[auto_execok CALLERPROGRAM]
If you were passing the arguments 1 and 2 over, you'd do this:
exec {*}[auto_execok CALLERPROGRAM] 1 2
Again, that does not say how those values get from the command line into the Pick Basic subprogram. You'll need to consult the Pick documentation for how to do that. But I know (and have tested) that Tcl will definitely have correctly provided them…
In Pick BASIC CALL statements are used to call subroutines and they can't be directly executed from TCL. Subroutines are denoted by setting the first word on the first line of the program to SUBROUTINE.
You can execute "programs" from TCL. These don't include the SUBROUTINE at the top of the source code. In some Pick BASIC variants you may need to include PROGRAM but I think most don't require that (I know D3 doesn't). These programs can be run from TCL but they don't get the command line parameters passed in automatically like subroutines do. I think you can use SENTENCE() in pretty much any Pick BASIC variant to get the command line parameters.
Here's an example program that will print the command line arguments:
PRINT SENTENCE()
END
You could use this to create a program that will take the command line arguments and pass them into a subroutine to do something for you.
I was literally typing out some elaborate answer, but your question has been answered. You cant directly call a subroutine, you need to call a program that calls the subroutine. Also subroutines are a good way to separate code from the main program to reduce clutter, but they arent always necessary. Other methods you can use are functions, or GOSUBS/GOTOS. This is an example of a GOTO below..
VAR = 'HELLO'
GOTO 10:
10:
CRT VAR
from the TCL you will call the name of your program and all of this code will be executed without calling another program.
The output will be the string hello.
I wrote a utility 30+ years ago to address this. Other Basics (QB, VB, Dartmouth) have a single command line. You are either writing lines into a program or processing single line requests. Pick did not.
I created an MD item called PRINT. It then runs a program called BP PRINT that takes the whole TCLREAD line, writes it out to another program space called BP PPRINT, compiles it and then runs it.
Incredibly useful. Thus at TCL these commands would work:
PRINT ; X=1 ; Y=2 ; CALL SOMESUB(X,Y)
PRINT ; FOR I=1 TO 12 ; PRINT (I*28)"DMA" ; NEXT I
PRINT ; OPEN "CUST" THEN READV NAME FROM "1234", 1 THEN PRINT NAME
PRINT OCONV("12345678","MD2Z,$")
PRINT DATE()
Basically anything that can be programmed within a single line of code can be typed at TCL this way. Any IF or ELSE statements must be completed in the same one line. Great for testing.
Should be part of every Pick implementation out of the box.
Mark Johnson
I have a CTestList.cmake file containing this function definition and call:
function(add_test_r testname )
add_test(
${testname} python executeRegressionTestCase.py ${testname}
)
endfunction(add_test_r)
add_test_r(Test01)
I need to support testing through CMake directly, cmake ..; make test, and through CTest without running CMake first. When CMake builds the test target and I run make test, the function above executes fine. However, when I run the same file with CTest, ${testname} is empty. Are function variables not supported in CTestList when running with CTest or is there something I'm missing?
I don't have a definitive answer, but after some testing it looks like CMake does a preprocessing step for the input files. Specifically, it reads in CTestList.cmake, evaluates the variables and functions, and generates an "expanded" CTestTestfile.cmake. Running CTest with a steering script does not run the preprocessing step so the variables and functions are not expanded. A few people on the internet have suggested that the CTestTestfile.cmake used in the steering script should be generated by CMake in the first place. Unfortunately, thats not the use case I'm looking for, but it may help someone else with running into this problem.
I've written an octave script, hello.m, which calls subfunc.m, and which takes a single input file, a command line argument, data.txt, which it loads with load(argv(){1}).
If I put all three files in the same directory, and call it like
./hello.m data.txt
then all is well.
But if I've got another data.txt in another directory, and I want to run my script on it, and I call
../helloscript/hello.m data.txt
this fails because hello.m can't find subfunc.m.
If I call
octave --path "../helloscript" ../helloscript/hello.m data.txt
then that seems to work fine.
The problem is that if I don't have a data.txt in the directory, then the script will pick up any data.txt that is lying around in ../helloscript.
This seems a bit fragile. Is there any way to tell octave, preferably in the script itself, to get subfunctions from the same directory as the script, but to get everything else relative to the current directory.
The best robust solution I can think of at the moment is to inline the subfunction in the script, which is a bit nasty.
Is there a good way to do this, or is it just a thorny problem that will cause occasional hard to find problems and can't be avoided?
Is this in fact just a general problem with scripting languages that I've just never noticed before? How does e.g. python deal with it?
It seems like there should be some sort of library-load-path that can be set without altering the data-load-path.
Adding all your subfunctions to your program file is not nasty at all. Why would you think so? It is perfectly normal to have function definitions in your script. The only language I know that does not do this is Matlab but that's just braindead.
The other alternative you have is to check that the input file argument, data.txt exists. Like so:
fpath = argv (){1};
[info, err, msg] = stat (fpath);
if (err)
error ("could not stat `%s' : %s", fpath, msg);
endif
## continue your script knowing the file exists
But really, I would recommend you to use both. Add your subfunctions in your main program, the only reason to have it on separate file is if you plan on sharing with other programs, and always check input arguments.
I have a program which performs a useful task. Now I want to produce the plain-text source code when the compiled executable runs, in addition to performing the original task. This is not a quine, but is probably related.
This capability would be useful in general, but my specific program is written in Fortran 90 and uses Mako Templates. When compiled it has access to the original source code files, but I want to be able to ensure that the source exists when a user runs the executable.
Is this possible to accomplish?
Here is an example of a simple Fortran 90 which does a simple task.
program exampl
implicit none
write(*,*) 'this is my useful output'
end program exampl
Can this program be modified such that it performs the same task (outputs a string when compiled) and outputs a Fortran 90 text file containing the source?
Thanks in advance
It's been so long since I have touched Fortran (and I've never dealt with Fortran 90) that I'm not certain but I see a basic approach that should work so long as the language supports string literals in the code.
Include your entire program inside itself in a block of literals. Obviously you can't include the literals within this, instead you need some sort of token that tells your program to include the block of literals.
Obviously this means you have two copies of the source, one inside the other. As this is ugly I wouldn't do it that way, but rather store your source with the include_me token in it and run it through a program that builds the nested files before you compile it. Note that this program will share a decent amount of code with the routine that recreates the code from the block of literals. If you're going to go this route I would also make the program spit out the source for this program so whoever is trying to modify the files doesn't need to deal with the two copies.
My original program (see question) is edited: add an include statement
Call this file "exampl.f90"
program exampl
implicit none
write(*,*) "this is my useful output"
open(unit=2,file="exampl_out.f90")
include "exampl_source.f90"
close(2)
end program exampl
Then another program (written in Python in this case) reads that source
import os
f=open('exampl.f90') # read in exampl.f90
g=open('exampl_source.f90','w') # and replace each line with write(*,*) 'line'
for line in f:
#print 'write(2,*) \''+line.rstrip()+'\'\n',
g.write('write(2,*) \''+line.rstrip()+'\'\n')
f.close
g.close
# then complie exampl.f90 (which includes exampl_source.f90)
os.system('gfortran exampl.f90')
os.system('/bin/rm exampl_source.f90')
Running this python script produces an executable. When the executable is run, it performs the original task AND prints the source code.
I have to do the verification of DPRAM.
Each test case is written in different file named test1.v,test2.v etc.
I want to write a script(unix) such that when I type run test1.v then only that test case will run.
Note :- test1.v contents only task which includes read assert,write assert etc.
The test bench is a separate file which includes clock and component instantiation.
when run test1.v is done then it should link the test1.v task to the testbench and then output is obtained.
I have done the coding in verilog
How to do this?
So, as far as I can make out, your different tests, or 'testcases' are in files named test<n>.v. And I'll assume that each of these testcases has a task that has the same name in all files, say run_testcase. This means that your testbench (testbench.v, say) must look something like:
module testbench();
...
`include "test.v" // <- problem is this line
...
initial begin
// Some setup
run_testcase();
//
$finish;
end
endmodule
So your problem is the include line - a different file needs to be included depending on the testcase. I can think of two ways of solving this first one is as toolic suggested - using a symbolic link to 'rename' the testcase file. So an example wrapper script (run_sim1) to launch your sim might look a bit like:
#! /usr/bin/env sh
testcase=$1
ln -sf ${testcase} test.v
my_simulator testbench.v
Another way is to use a macro, and define this in the wrapper script for your simulation. Your testbench would be modified to look like:
...
`include `TESTCASE
...
And the wrapper script (run_sim2):
#! /usr/bin/env sh
testcase=$1
my_simulator testbench.v +define+TESTCASE=\"${testcase}\"
The quotes are important here, as the verilog include directive expects them. Unfortunately, we can't leave the quotes in the testbench because it will then look like a string to verilog, and the TESTCASE macro won't be expanded.
One way to do it is to have the testbench file include a test file with a generic name:
`include "test.v"
Then, have your script create a symbolic link to the test you want to run. For example, in a shell script or Makefile, to run test1.v:
ln -sf test1.v test.v
run_sim
To run test2.v, your script would substitute test2 for test1, etc.