So I'm looking at FindMatio.cmake to use it for a program and keep seeing this at the bottom of everyone's version. It seems unlikely that everyone is using this incorrectly on purpose. I cannot wrap my head around why an if else would have the same boolean. Can anyone explain or is this just wrong?
IF(MATIO_FOUND)
SET(MATIO_LIBRARIES ${MATIO_LIBRARY})
SET(MATIO_INCLUDE_DIRS ${MATIO_INCLUDE_DIR})
ELSE(MATIO_FOUND)
SET(MATIO_LIBRARIES)
SET(MATIO_INCLUDE_DIRS)
ENDIF(MATIO_FOUND)
Related
Trying to develop an VS extension to help with migration from vb6 to Vb.net using Roslyn.
Unfortunately I am not having much luck with detecting the "DoEvents" expression in my source as I get NULL from my GetDeclaredSymbol during the detection.
My bad coding is......
Register the action:
context.RegisterSyntaxNodeAction(AddressOf ExpressionStatementDec, SyntaxKind.InvocationExpression)
Try and detect the "DoEvents" expression:
Private Sub ExpressionStatementDec(context As SyntaxNodeAnalysisContext)
Dim GotYou = context.SemanticModel.GetDeclaredSymbol(context.Node)
Dim WhatExpression = context.Node.ToFullString.ToString
' Find DoEvents.
If RemoveWhitespace(WhatExpression) = "DoEvents" Then
Dim diag = Diagnostic.Create(Rule, GotYou.Locations(0), GotYou.Name)
context.ReportDiagnostic(diag)
End If
End Sub
I have tried loads of options for trying to get the right type of object for "GotYou" but no luck so far.
Any pointers appreciated :)
Edit Additional info:
I have tried GetSymbolInfo but when I am detecting "DoEvents" in the context.Node.ToFullString.ToString I am still not getting anything in the context.SemanticModel.GetSymbolInfo(context.Node) as below.
Thanks,
Richard
If you want to look at what a invocation is referencing, call GetSymbolInfo not GetDeclaredSymbol.
Don’t have Visual Studio handy in order to get the code, but...
I believe what you want is something like:
Dim WhatExpression = TryCast(CType(context.Node, InvocationExpressionSyntax).Expression, IdentifierNameSyntax)?.Identifier.Text
This isn’t all of it, you could be dealing with a memberaccessexpression, in which case it’s probably not what you are looking for. The options would be a bit easier to handle with pattern matching in C#, but that’s the general idea. You don’t need the semantic tree at this point, because you first want to verify that you are dealing with the right text. Once you’ve got that, you can see where it comes from and whether it is something you need to deal with. Getting the semantic model is expensive, no reason to do so when (outside of your unit test) it is rarely going to be needed.
I have seen a lot of questions about this but I couldn't find the correct answer for me which works.
The object which triggers the problem is like
test123.de.company.com.Database.dbo.Table
Test123.de.company.com
is the database Server.
Object name contains more than the maximum prefixes allowed
I have tried to write it like this [test123.de.company.com].Database.dbo.Table just like [test123.de.company.com].[Database].[dbo].[Table]
Can you tell me what's wrong with this?
Please try this:
["test123.de.company.com"].[Database].[dbo].[Table]
OP also encountered a new problem after implementing this solution above. OP said:
Thank you! This worked for me. To be more precise, the join is for a
view and if I save/close and then later get back to the design option
the quote marks are removed and there is [test123.de.company.com] left
over and the error returns. Is there a way to keep them fixed?
Otherwise if I change anything I always have to add the quote marks
again and again
Then with the help of DaleK that problem also was solved. DaleK:
Don't use the design option, script it as alter instead
I've recently encountered these two variables in some Velocity code:
$!variable1
!$variable2
I was surprised by the similarity of these so I became suspicious about the correctness of the code and become interested in finding the difference between two.
Is it possible that velocity allows any order of these two symbols or do they have different purpose? Do you know the answer?
#Jr. Here is the guide I followed when doing VM R&D: http://velocity.apache.org/engine/1.7/user-guide.html
Velocity uses the !$ and $! annotations for different things. If you use !$ it will basically be the same as a normal "!" operator, but the $! is used as a basic check to see if the variable is blank and if so it prints it out as an empty string. If your variable is empty or null and you don't use the $! annotation it will print the actual variable name as a string.
I googled and stackoverflowed a lot before I finally found the answer at people.apache.org.
According to that:
It is very easy to confuse the quiet reference notation with the
boolean not-Operator. Using the not-Operator, you use !${foo}, while
the quiet reference notation is $!{foo}. And yes, you will end up
sometimes with !$!{foo}...
Easy after all, shame it didn't struck me immediately. Hope this helps someone.
I was given a querystring that looks something like the following:
"(foo :"bar" OR baz : "qux") AND
(abc:def OR test:ok OR (fish:carp AND foobar:bazqux))
AND NOT otherthing:true
AND -(-derp:*)
OR (name:* AND abcdef:[* TO *])"
I need to figure out what query language this is so I can find the rest of the documentation on it, but I can't seem to figure out exactly what it is. It appears to be some form of SQL, but it has some small differences from what I've previously seen. Does anyone know what this might be?
In this question, a user commented to never use the With block in VB. Why?
"Never" is a strong word.
I think it fine as long as you don't abuse it (like nesting)
IMHO - this is better:
With MyCommand.Parameters
.Count = 1
.Item(0).ParameterName = "#baz"
.Item(0).Value = fuz
End With
Than:
MyCommand.Parameters.Count = 1
MyCommand.Parameters.Item(0).ParameterName = "#baz"
MyCommand.Parameters.Item(0).Value = fuz
There is nothing wrong about the With keyword. It's true that it may reduce readibility when nested but the solution is simply don't use nested With.
There may be namespace problems in Delphi, which doesn't enforce a leading dot but that issue simply doesn't exist in VB.NET so the people that are posting rants about Delphi are losing their time in this question.
I think the real reason many people don't like the With keyword is that is not included in C* languages and many programmers automatically think that every feature not included in his/her favourite language is bad.
It's just not helpful compared to other options.
If you really miss it you can create a one or two character alias for your object instead. The alias only takes one line to setup, rather than two for the With block (With + End With lines).
The alias also gives you a quick mouse-over reference for the type of the variable. It provides a hook for the IDE to help you jump back to the top of the block if you want (though if the block is that large you have other problems). It can be passed as an argument to functions. And you can use it to reference an index property.
So we have an alternative that gives more function with less code.
Also see this question:
Why is the with() construct not included in C#, when it is really cool in VB.NET?
The with keyword is only sideswiped in a passing reference here in an hilarious article by the wonderful Verity Stob, but it's worth it for the vitriol: See the paragraph that starts
While we are on identifier confusion. The with keyword...
Worth reading the entire article!
The With keyword also provides another benefit - the object(s) in the With statement only need to be "qualified" once, which can improve performance. Check out the information on MSDN here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/wc500chb(VS.80).aspx
So by all means, use it.