Unexpected tokens (use ; to separate expressions in the same line) - kotlin

val a = 2
if (a==1 | a==2) {
}
This code doesnt compile - error "Unexpected tokens (use ; to separate expressions in the same line)
How to solve? why is that even a problem? and why do the tutorials not aware of that compilation error here ?
Kotlin playground with that code

looks like a mistake on translating it to kotlin.
if you look on the java part they use
if (geofenceTransition == Geofence.GEOFENCE_TRANSITION_ENTER ||
geofenceTransition == Geofence.GEOFENCE_TRANSITION_EXIT)
so in that case use or keyword or ;-) ||
fun main() {
println("Hello, world!!!")
val a = 2
if ((a==1) or (a==2)) {
println("fine")
}
}

Related

When is it a block and when is it a lambda?

How does the Kotlin compiler decide whether an expression enclosed in { } is a block or a lambda?
Consider this:
val a: Int
if (cond)
a = 1
else
a = 2
can be written more succinctly as:
val a =
if (cond)
1
else
2
Similarly, one might think that this:
val a: () -> Int
if (cond)
a = { 1 }
else
a = { 2 }
should be able to be written more succinctly like this:
val a =
if (cond)
{ 1 }
else
{ 2 }
But this is not the same: a is now an Int, and not of type () -> Int, because now the { 1 } is no longer a lambda. What are the rules that say whether something is a lambda or a block?
I didn't look into the Kotlin lexer, but I guess there are few possible places in the code where the compiler expects either a single expression or a block of code. That includes the code immediately following most of control flow statements like: if, else, while, when (one of its cases), etc. If you put { in one of these places, it will be interpreted as a start of the block of code related to this control flow statement and not as a lambda.
This is as simple as that. Note that even if you hint the compiler about the type, it still won't work:
// compile error
val a: () -> Int = if (cond)
{ 1 }
else
{ 2 }
It will be interpreted more like this:
// compile error
val a: () -> Int = if (cond) {
1
} else {
2
}
{ after if condition is always interpreted as a start of block of code. You need to put double {, } in cases like this:
// works fine
val a: () -> Int = if (cond) {
{ 1 }
} else {
{ 2 }
}
To put it very succinctly and easy to remember, the first opening brace after an if/when/else/for is always assumed to be the opening of a block. Use double braces if you want a lambda in there.
This is specified in the Kotlin Language Specification, section 1.2: Syntax Grammar:
The grammar defines a block as statements between { and }. In most cases (such as function bodies) the syntax is different between a block and a lambda. Where it is the same is in the usage of controlStructureBody - these are the places where the block has a value, or where you could put a non-block expression in its place. If you search the whole spec document for "controlStructureBody", you'll find it's used in the following places:
For statement
While statement
Do-while statement
If expression
When expression
When entry
In every other place where a value is required, a '{' signifies the start of a lambda.

Dynamic property access in Kotlin

From the Kotlin Fundamentals course, we have this code:
#BindingAdapter("sleepImage")
fun ImageView.setSleepImage(item: SleepNight?) {
item?.let {
setImageResource(when (item.sleepQuality) {
0 -> R.drawable.ic_sleep_0
1 -> R.drawable.ic_sleep_1
2 -> R.drawable.ic_sleep_2
3 -> R.drawable.ic_sleep_3
4 -> R.drawable.ic_sleep_4
5 -> R.drawable.ic_sleep_5
else -> R.drawable.ic_sleep_active
})
}
}
In other languages I would simplify this by using the sleepQuality integer to look up the matching element, in Typescript for example:
setImageResource(R.drawable[`ic_sleep_${item.sleepQuality}`] ?? R.drawable.ic_sleep_active)
To start trying this out even my first step doesn't compile:
0 -> R.drawable["ic_sleep_0"] // doesn't compile
Is this kind of operation possible in Kotlin?
Edit/Update
There's a few good responses here.
It looks like for this specific use case, I can look up resources by string, similar to what I'm trying:
val resId = context.resources.getIdentifier("ic_sleep_${item.sleepQuality}", "drawable", context.packageName)
However, this is not a general solution. The following does not work:
val x = item['sleepQuality']
As noted in some responses, this may be possible using reflection. How would this be done?
val resId = context.resources.getIdentifier("ic_sleep_${item.sleepQuality}", "drawable", context.packageName)
setImageResource(if (resId != 0) resId else R.drawable.ic_sleep_active)
Through reflection (based on Getting value of public static final field/property of a class in Java via reflection) :
val resId = try {
R.string::class.java.getField("ic_sleep_${item.sleepQuality}").getInt(null)
} catch (e: Exception) {
R.string.ic_sleep_active
}
setImageResource(resId)
Only using reflection. Kotlin statically typed programming language and does not support "Variable variables"

How to replace the 'When' statement to a simple ternary statement in kotlin

1.Can I simplify the code in when statement to one or two lines.I am trying to replace the code in the when block but unable to do it.
// Loads all the settings changed in the theme
override fun onCreate() {
super.onCreate()
var sharedPreferences = getSharedPreferences(
CatalystConstants.keyThemeObject,
AppCompatActivity.MODE_PRIVATE
)
when (sharedPreferences.getInt(CatalystConstants.prefName, CatalystConstants.themeLight)) {
CatalystConstants.themeLight -> {
AppCompatDelegate.setDefaultNightMode(AppCompatDelegate.MODE_NIGHT_NO)
}
CatalystConstants.themeDark -> {
AppCompatDelegate.setDefaultNightMode(AppCompatDelegate.MODE_NIGHT_YES)
}
}
}
}```
If there are only two possible values, you can do this, although in my opinion when would be much clearer to read because the comparison is so long.
appCompatDelegate.defaultNightMode = if(sharedPreferences.getInt(CatalystConstants.prefName, CatalystConstants.themeLight)
== CatalystConstants.themeLight)
AppCompatDelegate.MODE_NIGHT_NO
else // themeDark
AppCompatDelegate.MODE_NIGHT_YES
With when:
appCompatDelegate.defaultNightMode =
when (sharedPreferences.getInt(CatalystConstants.prefName, CatalystConstants.themeLight)) {
CatalystConstants.themeLight -> AppCompatDelegate.MODE_NIGHT_NO
CatalystConstants.themeDark -> AppCompatDelegate.MODE_NIGHT_YES
}
Could be more concise using run. It's not very clear, but that's because you aren't using all caps for your constant names:
CatalystConstants.run {
appCompatDelegate.defaultNightMode =
when (sharedPreferences.getInt(prefName, themeLight)) {
themeLight -> AppCompatDelegate.MODE_NIGHT_NO
themeDark -> AppCompatDelegate.MODE_NIGHT_YES
}
}
There is not if-else ternary expresion in Kotlin but you can write if-else statment in this way:
if (a > b) a else b
It's the most similar way to ternary if-else

Xbase Interpreter: Could not access field on instance: null

I am testing the idea of making my dsl Jvm compatible and I wanted to test the possibility of extending Xbase and using the interpreter. I have tried to make a minimal test project to use with the interpreter but I am getting a runtime error. I think I understand the general concepts of adapting Xbase, but am unsure about how the setup/entrypoints for the interpreter and could not find any information regarding the error I am getting or how to resolve. Here are the relevant files for my situation:
Text.xtext:
import "http://www.eclipse.org/xtext/xbase/Xbase" as xbase
import "http://www.eclipse.org/xtext/common/JavaVMTypes" as types
Program returns Program:
{Program}
'program' name=ID '{'
variables=Var_Section?
run=XExpression?
'}'
;
Var_Section returns VarSection:
{VarSection}
'variables' '{'
decls+=XVariableDeclaration+
'}'
;
#Override // Change syntax
XVariableDeclaration returns xbase::XVariableDeclaration:
type=JvmTypeReference name=ID '=' right=XLiteral ';'
;
#Override // Do not allow declarations outside of variable region
XExpressionOrVarDeclaration returns xbase::XExpression:
XExpression;
TestJvmModelInferrer:
def dispatch void infer(Program element, IJvmDeclaredTypeAcceptor acceptor, boolean isPreIndexingPhase) {
acceptor.accept(element.toClass(element.fullyQualifiedName)) [
documentation = element.documentation
if (element.variables !== null) {
for (decl : element.variables.decls) {
members += decl.toField(decl.name, decl.type) [
static = true
initializer = decl.right
visibility = JvmVisibility.PUBLIC
]
}
}
if (element.run !== null) {
members += element.run.toMethod('main', typeRef(Void::TYPE)) [
parameters += element.run.toParameter("args", typeRef(String).addArrayTypeDimension)
visibility = JvmVisibility.PUBLIC
static = true
body = element.run
]
}
]
}
Test case:
#Inject ParseHelper<Program> parseHelper
#Inject extension ValidationTestHelper
#Inject XbaseInterpreter interpreter
#Test
def void basicInterpret() {
val result = parseHelper.parse('''
program program1 {
variables {
int var1 = 0;
double var2 = 3.4;
}
var1 = 13
}
''')
result.assertNoErrors
var interpretResult = interpreter.evaluate(result.run)
println(interpretResult.result)
Partial stack trace:
java.lang.IllegalStateException: Could not access field: program1.var1 on instance: null
at org.eclipse.xtext.xbase.interpreter.impl.XbaseInterpreter._assignValueTo(XbaseInterpreter.java:1262)
at org.eclipse.xtext.xbase.interpreter.impl.XbaseInterpreter.assignValueTo(XbaseInterpreter.java:1221)
at org.eclipse.xtext.xbase.interpreter.impl.XbaseInterpreter._doEvaluate(XbaseInterpreter.java:1213)
at org.eclipse.xtext.xbase.interpreter.impl.XbaseInterpreter.doEvaluate(XbaseInterpreter.java:216)
at org.eclipse.xtext.xbase.interpreter.impl.XbaseInterpreter.internalEvaluate(XbaseInterpreter.java:204)
at org.eclipse.xtext.xbase.interpreter.impl.XbaseInterpreter.evaluate(XbaseInterpreter.java:190)
at org.eclipse.xtext.xbase.interpreter.impl.XbaseInterpreter.evaluate(XbaseInterpreter.java:180)
The interpreter does only support expressions, but does not work with types that are created by a JvmModelInferrer. Your code tries to work with fields of such an inferred type.
Rather than using the interpreter, I'd recommend to use an InMemoryCompiler in your test. The domainmodel example may serve as an inspiration: https://github.com/eclipse/xtext-eclipse/blob/c2b15c3ec118c4c200e2b28ea72d8c9116fb6800/org.eclipse.xtext.xtext.ui.examples/projects/domainmodel/org.eclipse.xtext.example.domainmodel.tests/xtend-gen/org/eclipse/xtext/example/domainmodel/tests/XbaseIntegrationTest.java
You may find this project interesting, which (among other stuff) implements an interpreter for Xtend based on the Xbase interpreter. It might be a bit outdated, though, and also will not fully support all Xtend concepts. But it could be a starting point, and your contrbutions are welcome :-)
https://github.com/kbirken/xtendency

How to test a function's output (stdout/stderr) in unit tests

I have a simple function I want to test:
func (t *Thing) print(min_verbosity int, message string) {
if t.verbosity >= minv {
fmt.Print(message)
}
}
But how can I test what the function actually sends to standard output? Test::Output does what I want in Perl. I know I could write all my own boilerplate to do the same in Go (as described here):
orig = os.Stdout
r,w,_ = os.Pipe()
thing.print("Some message")
var buf bytes.Buffer
io.Copy(&buf, r)
w.Close()
os.Stdout = orig
if(buf.String() != "Some message") {
t.Error("Failure!")
}
But that's a lot of extra work for every single test. I'm hoping there's a more standard way, or perhaps an abstraction library to handle this.
One thing to also remember, there's nothing stopping you from writing functions to avoid the boilerplate.
For example I have a command line app that uses log and I wrote this function:
func captureOutput(f func()) string {
var buf bytes.Buffer
log.SetOutput(&buf)
f()
log.SetOutput(os.Stderr)
return buf.String()
}
Then used it like this:
output := captureOutput(func() {
client.RemoveCertificate("www.example.com")
})
assert.Equal(t, "removed certificate www.example.com\n", output)
Using this assert library: http://godoc.org/github.com/stretchr/testify/assert.
You can do one of three things. The first is to use Examples.
The package also runs and verifies example code. Example functions may include a concluding line comment that begins with "Output:" and is compared with the standard output of the function when the tests are run. (The comparison ignores leading and trailing space.) These are examples of an example:
func ExampleHello() {
fmt.Println("hello")
// Output: hello
}
The second (and more appropriate, IMO) is to use fake functions for your IO. In your code you do:
var myPrint = fmt.Print
func (t *Thing) print(min_verbosity int, message string) {
if t.verbosity >= minv {
myPrint(message) // N.B.
}
}
And in your tests:
func init() {
myPrint = fakePrint // fakePrint records everything it's supposed to print.
}
func Test...
The third is to use fmt.Fprintf with an io.Writer that is os.Stdout in production code, but bytes.Buffer in tests.
You could consider adding a return statement to your function to return the string that is actually printed out.
func (t *Thing) print(min_verbosity int, message string) string {
if t.verbosity >= minv {
fmt.Print(message)
return message
}
return ""
}
Now, your test could just check the returned string against an expected string (rather than the print out). Maybe a bit more in-line with Test Driven Development (TDD).
And, in your production code, nothing would need to change, since you don't have to assign the return value of a function if you don't need it.