So far as I can tell, as of Java 1.15.2, there is no way to pinpoint a single block to check for a target, only at minimum a 2x2 area with [distance=..1]. distance=1, distance=0, distance=..0 all seem to do nothing at all. There used to be the (in my opinion, far more intuitive) [r=1] radius option, but that seems to have been relegated to Bedrock edition. How can Minecraft Java not allow you to target a specific location, or am I missing something?
yes. I think this is only possible in bedrock. wait actually its harder but possible!
dig down two blocks where you want to test
place always activating repeat command block with /execute WHILE TESTING FOR #p[dx=0, dy=2, dz=0] while running your chosen command (I dont know how to use execute exactly in java)
cover it up!
Related
I often work on very small pieces of code, on the order of max 100 lines, especially in scenarios when I learn something new and just play with the code, or when I debug.
Because I frequently change code and want to see how that changes the contents of my variables and output, it is tedious to either
1) hit the debug button, wait for the debugger to start (in my case I use PyCharm as an IDE) and then inspect the output
or
2) insert some prints for the variables that I want to observe and compile the code (slightly faster than starting the debugger).
To eliminate this time consuming workflow, where I constantly hit the compile or debug button every few seconds, is there an IDE where I can set a watch to a few variables and then each time I change in my source code a single character (or, alternatively, every half a second) the IDE automatically compiles everything and I will see then new values of my variables?
(Of course while I intermediatelychange the code the compilation will give errors, but that is ok. This feature would be a big time saver. Maybe PyCharm has it already implemented? If not, ideally I would hope for a language agnostic IDE, similar to PyCharm, where variants for Java etc. also exist. If not, since I code in Python, a Python IDE would also be great.)
This might not be exactly what you are looking for but PyCharm (and IntelliJ and probably others) can run tests automatically when code changes.
In the PyCharm Run toolbar look for "Toggle auto-test" button.
For example in PyCharm you can create test cases that just runs the code you're interested in and prints the variables you need.
Then create a run configuration that runs only those tests and set it to run automatically.
For more details see PyCharm documentation on rerunning tests.
The Scala plugin for IntelliJ has exactly what you need in the form of "worksheets," where every expression is automatically recompiled when its value or the value of anything it references is changed.
Since (based on your usage of PyCharm), I assume you're using Python primarily, I think Jupyter notebook is your best bet. Jupyter is language agnostic but began as specific to python (it was called IPython notebook for this reason).
I have not tried it, but this guide purports to show to get Jupyter to work with PyCharm
EDIT: Here is another possibility called vim worksheet; I haven't tried it, but it purports to do the same thing as Scala worksheets, but in vim, and for a number of languages, including Python.
The python Spyder IDE (comes with Anaconda) has this feature. When you hit run, you can see all of the variables at the top right of the screen and you can click on them to see their values (this is very helpful with Numpy Arrays too!).
If your interest is in the actual workflow improvement:
I used to program like you, looking at what my variables changed to, and design or debug my code based on such modifications, however is way to inefficient and costly to set what variables to watch over and over again and besides when if it bugs, you have to go all over again for the debugging process.
I changed my design process to better my workflow and adopted Test Driven Development (TDD), with it you can look at tools for you specific implementations or IDEs but the principles and workflow stay with you, with it you stop looking on how the variables changed and instead focus on what the functions should do, meaning faster iteration (with real time tools for testing), easier debugging and far more better, safe refactoring.
My favorite tool for it is Cucumber, and agnostic tool (for IDE or programming language) which help you test your code scenarios and at the same time documenting your features.
Hope it helps, i know its a very opinionated answer but it's an honest advices for improvement in ones workflow.
You should try Thonny. It is developed by Institute of Computer Science of University of Tartu.
The 4 features which might be of help to you are below (verbatim from the website):
No-hassle variables.
Once you're done with hello-worlds, select View → Variables and see how your programs and shell commands affect Python variables.
Simple debugger.
Just press Ctrl+F5 instead of F5 and you can run your programs step-by-step, no breakpoints needed. Press F6 for a big step and F7 for a small step. Steps follow program structure, not just code lines.
Stepping through statements
Step through expression evaluation. If you use small steps, then you can even see how Python evaluates your expressions. You can think of this light-blue box as a piece of paper where Python replaces subexpressions with their values, piece-by-piece.
Visualization of expression evaluation
Faithful representation of function calls.
Stepping into a function call opens a new window with separate local variables table and code pointer. Good understanding of how function calls work is especially important for understanding recursion.
I just converted one of the FsXaml demo programs to an interpreted F# script so I could experiment with it and learn. It wouldn't run, and the interpreter gave me the following error message:
System.NotSupportedException: The invoked member is not supported in a
dynamic assembly.
at System.Reflection.Emit.InternalAssemblyBuilder.GetManifestResourceStream(String
name)
at FsXaml.InjectXaml.from(String file, Object root)
at
FsXaml.App.InitializeComponent() at FsXaml.App..ctor()
at
FSI_0002.main[a](a argv)
in C:\Users\bobmc\OneDrive\FSharp\Learning\WPFExamples\FsXaml\demos\WpfSimpleMvvmApplication\WPFApp.fsx:line 104
at .$FSI_0002.main#() in
C:\Users\bobmc\OneDrive\FSharp\Learning\WPFExamples\FsXaml\demos\WpfSimpleMvvmApplication\WPFApp.fsx:line
109
Can I use the F# interpreter with FsXaml? Thanks to all for your help.
Unfortunately, WPF and scripts don't play well together.
The exception occurs within the WPF runtime itself - FsXaml.InjectXaml is using a XamlObjectWriter to populate the type with the contents from the XAML file. This type doesn't work if you're using a dynamic assembly (like FSI), which unfortunately means that FsXaml will likely never be able to work from FSI.
That being said, even if there was a way around this, it'd be of very limited use. WPF also has restrictions that make it not play well with a scripting scenario, such as the "only one application can ever be created within a given AppDomain" restriction. That one makes it so closing the "main" (first) window makes it so you can never open another one. As such, I haven't prioritized trying to make this work in FSI.
I'd be happy to accept contributions if somebody has an idea of how to make FsXaml play more nicely within the context of FSI, but at this point, I don't see a good solution for that usage scenario.
Edit: FsXaml 3.1.6 now includes functionality to make this a lot easier. It works well, provided you don't close the main window, or you use dialogs. There is a demo application/script illustrating this.
I was wondering if there were a way to compute the size of a reg in Verilog. I researched it quite a bit, and found $size(a), but it's only in SystemVerilog, and it won't work in my verilog program.
Does anyone know an alternative for this??
I also wanted to ask as a side note; I'm having some trouble with my test bench in the sense that when I update a value in the file, that change is not taken in consideration when I simulate. I've been told I might have been using an old test bench but the one I am continuously simulating is the only one available in this project.
EDIT:
To give you an idea of what's the problem: in my code there is a "start" signal and when it is set to 1, the operation starts. Otherwise, it stays idle. I began writing the test bench with start=0, tested it and simulated it, then edited the test bench by setting start to 1. But when I simulate it, the start signal remains 0 in the waveform. I tried to check whether I was using another test bench, but it is the only test bench I am using in this project.
Given that I was on a deadline, I worked on the code so that it would adapt to the "frozen" test bench. I am getting now all the results I want, but I wanted to test some other features of my code, so I created a new project and copy pasted the code in new files (including the same test bench). But when I ran a simulation, the waveform displayed wrong results (even though I was using the exact same code in all modules and test bench). Any idea why?
Any help would be appreciated :)
There is a standardised way to do this, but it requires you to use the VPI, which I don't think you get on Modelsim's student edition. In short, you have to write C code, and dynamically link it to the simulator. In the C code, you can get object properties using routines such as vpi_get. Useful properites might be vpiSize, which is what you want, vpiLeftRange, vpiRightRange, and so on.
Having said all that, Verilog is essentially a static language, and objects have to be declared with a static width using constant expressions. Having a run-time method to determine an object's size is therefore of pretty limited value (since you should already know it), and may not solve whatever problem you actually have. Your question would make more sense for VHDL (and SystemVerilog?), which are much more dynamic.
Note on Icarus: the developers have pushed lots of SystemVerilog stuff back into the main language. If you take advantge of this you may find that your code is not portable.
Second part of your question: you need to be specific on what your problem actually is.
Sometimes when looking at someone else's large Objective-C program, it is hard to know where to begin.
In such situations, I think it would be helpful to log every call to every non-Apple method.
Is there a way to do that? Basically, make one change in some central place, and log every method that is called. Preferably limited to non-Apple methods.
You can set the environment variable NSObjCMessageLoggingEnabled to YES. This will write a log of all message sends in the folder /tmp/msgSends-xxx.
You could add a symbolic breakpoint to objc_msgSend(), and have it log the second parameter without stopping.
How to do it for your own methods only though is a toucher task. Maybe if you could inspect the class name being called and do some magic to have a conditional breakpoint for only calls where the class' prefix matches your own?
I don't think logging every single call is practical enough to be useful, but here's a suggestion in that direction.
On a side note, if it's a large program, it better have some kind of documentation or an intro comment for people to get started with the code.
In any case, every Cocoa application has an applicationDidFinishLaunching... method. It's a good place to start from. Some apps also have their principal (or 'main window') class defined in the Info.plist file. Both these things might give you a hint as to what classes (specifically, view controllers) are the most prominent ones and what methods are likely to have long stack-traces while the program is running. Like a game-loop in a game engine, or some other frequently called method. By placing a breakpoint inside such a method and looking at the stack-trace in the debugger, you can get a general idea of what's going on.
If it's a UI-heavy app, looking at its NIB files and classes used in them may also help identify parts of app's functionality you might be looking for.
Another option is to fire up the Time Profiler instrument and check both Hide missing symbols and Hide system libraries checkboxes. This will give you not only a bird's eye view on the methods being called inside the program, but also will pin-point the most often called ones.
By interacting with your program with the Time Profiler recording on, you could also identify different parts of the program's functionality and correlate them with your actions pretty easily.
Instruments allows you to build your own "instruments", which are really just DTrace scripts in disguise. Use the menu option Instrument >> Build New Instrument and select options like which library you'd like to trace, what you'd like to record when you hit particular functions, etc. Go wild!
That's an interesting question. The answer would be more interesting if the solution supported multiple execution threads and there were some sort of call timeline that could report the activity over time (maybe especially with user events plotted in somehow).
I usually fire up the debugger, set a breakpoint at the main entry point (e.g. - applicationDidFinishLaunching:withOptions:) and walk it in the debugger.
On OSX, there are also some command-line tools (e.g. sample and heap) that can provide some insight.
It seems like some kind of integration with instruments could be really cool, but I am not aware of something that does exactly what you're wanting (and I want it now too after thinking about it).
If one were to log a thread number, and call address, and some frame details, it seems like the pieces would be there to plot the call timeline. The logic for figuring out the appropriate library (Apple-provided or third party) should exist in Apple's symbolicatecrash script.
The idea is that given a specific input to the program, somehow I want to automatically step-in through the complete program and dump its control flow along with all the data being used like classes and their variables. Is their a straightforward way to do this? Or can this be done by some scripting over gdb or does it require modification in gdb?
Ok the reason for this question is because of an idea regarding a debugging tool. What it does is this. Given two different inputs to a program, one causing an incorrect output and the other a correct one, it will tell what part of the control flow differ for them.
So What I think will be needed is a complete dump of these 2 control flows going into a diff engine. And if the two inputs are following similar control flows then their diff would (in many cases) give a good idea about why the bug exist.
This can be made into a very engaging tool with many features build on top of this.
Tell us a little more about the environment. dtrace, for example, will do a marvelous job of this in Solaris or Leopard. gprof is another possibility.
A bumpo version of this could be done with yes(1), or expect(1).
If you want to get fancy, GDB can be scripted with Python in some versions.
What you are describing sounds a bit like gdb's "tracepoint debugging".
See gdb's internal help "help tracepoint". You can also see a whitepaper
here: http://sourceware.org/gdb/talks/esc-west-1999/
Unfortunately, this functionality is not currently implemented for
native debugging, but I believe that CodeSourcery is doing some work
on it.
Check this out, unlike Coverity, Fenris is free and widly used..
How to print the next N executed lines automatically in GDB?