How would one achieve to keep IntelliJ from removing spaces in Python (or any language for that matter) in areas where spaces serve a specific purpose of readability, such as repetitive assignments of many values.
is how I like it and I think many vim users agree that this is the way to go.
However, this is what IntelliJ makes out of it
The issue is specifically interesting with language such as python where spaces can (but do not have to) impact the programs flow.
I am also aware that it is rather difficult to define when spaces should be compacted (i.e. when only one of the 4 lines above are present) and when they should be kept.
I guess some heuristic approaches would work, this however wouldn't really be a 100% on-spot lintable situation.
I like your idea, but don't see how to achieve that within the Editor Settings.
An ugly alternative that does work, but "pollutes" your source, is to Enable formatter markers in comments on this screen: File -> Settings -> Editor -> Code Style:
After choosing that option you can selectively create blocks of code that will be ignored by IDEA when it formats the code:
// #formatter:off
String s1 = "Arkansas" + ".";
String s2 = "Maine" + ".";
String s3 = "Massachusetts" + ".";
String s4 = "Ohio" + ".";
// #formatter:on
You could also raise a bug report with JetBrains: "Provide an option to allow multiple embedded spaces in source code". That should be fairly straightforward for them to implement: just don't replace multiple embedded spaces by a single space when reformatting.
Related
Sorry if this is documented somewhere, but I haven't been able to find it. When using brace delimiters with qq, code is not interpolated:
qq.raku
#!/usr/bin/env raku
say qq{"Two plus two": { 2 + 2 }};
say qq["Two plus two": { 2 + 2 }];
$ ./qq.raku
"Two plus two": { 2 + 2 }
"Two plus two": 4
Obviously, this isn't a big deal since I can use a different set of delimiters, but I ran across it and thought I'd ask.
Update
As #raiph pointed out, I forgot to put the actual question: Is this the way it's supposed to work?
The quote language "nibbler" (the bit of the grammar that eats its way through a quoted string) looks like this:
[
<!stopper>
[
|| <starter> <nibbler> <stopper>
|| <escape>
|| .
]
]*
That is, until we see a stopper, eat whichever comes first of:
A starter (the opening { in your case), followed by some internal stuff, followed by a stopper (the }); this allows for nesting of the construct inside of the string
An escape (and closure interpolation is considered a kind of escape)
Any other character
This ordering in the grammar means that a nesting of the chosen quote starter/stopper will always win over an escape. This issue was discussed during the language design; we could, after all, have reordered the alternation in the grammar to have escapes win. On balance, however, it was felt that the choice of starter/stopper was the more local decision than the general properties of the quoting language, and so should take precedence. (This is also consistent with how quote languages are constructed: we take the base quoted string grammar and mix starter/stopper methods into it.)
Obviously, this isn't a big deal since I can use a different set of delimiters, but I ran across it and thought I'd ask.
You didn't ask anything. :)
Let's say you've got some text. And you want to use double quote processing to get interpolation, except you don't want braced text to be interpolated as code. You could write, say, qq:!c '...'. But don't you think it's a lot easier to remember, write, and read qq{ ... }?
Nice little touch, right?
Which is why it's the way it is -- it's a very nice touch.
And, perhaps, why it's not documented -- it's little, and, once you encounter it, obvious what you need to do.
That said, the Q lang escapes include ones to recursively re-enter the Q lang:
say qq{"Two plus two": \qq[{ 2 + 2 }] }; # "Two plus two": 4
Does that answer your question? :)
I am tasked to parse (and transform) a code of a computer language, that has a slight quirk in its rules, at least I see it this way. To be exact, the compiler treats new lines (as well as semicolons) as statement separators, but other than that (e.g. inside the statement) it treats them as spacers (whitespace).
As an example, this code:
try
local x = 5 / 0
catch (i)
print(i + "\n")
is proved to be equivalent to this:
try local x = 5 / 0 catch (i) print(i + "\n")
I don't see how I can express such a rule in EBNF, or specifically in Lark EBNF dialect. I mean in a sensible way. I probably could define all possible newline positions inside all statements, but it would be cumbersome and error-prone.
I wish to find a way to treat newlines contextually. Is there a proven method for this, preferably within Python/Lark domain? If I have to modify the parser for that purpose, then where should I start?
Or if I misunderstood something in this language in particular or in machine language parsing in general, or my statement of the problem is wrong, I'd also be happy to get educated.
(As you may guess, the language in question has a well proven implementation, but no officially defined grammar. Also, it is Squirrel, for all that it matters.)
The relevant quote from the "specification" is this:
A squirrel program is a simple sequence of statements.:
stats := stat [';'|'\n'] stats
[...] Statements can be separated with a new line or ‘;’ (or with the keywords case or default if inside a switch/case statement), both symbols are not required if the statement is followed by ‘}’.
These are relatively complex rules and in their totality not context free if newlines can also be ignored everywhere else. Note however that in my understanding the text implies that ; or \n are required when no of the other cases apply. That would make your example illegal. That probably means that the BNF as written is correct, e.g. both ; and \n are optionally everywhere. In that case you can (for lark) just put an %ignore "\n" statement and it should work fine.
Also, lark should not complain if you both ignore the \n and use it in a rule: Where useful it will match it in a rule, otherwise it will just ignore it. Note however that this breaks if you use a Terminal that includes the \n (e.g. WS or /\s/). Just have \n as an extra case.
(For the future: You will probably get faster response for lark questions if you ask over on gitter or at least put a link to SO there.)
In vue, is there a way to have a value span multiple lines in an .env file. Ex:
Instead of:
someValue=[{"someValue":"Here is a really really long piece which should be split into multiple lines"}]
I want to do something like:
someValue=`[{"someValue":"Here is a really
really long piece which
should be split into multiple lines"}]`
Doing the latter gives me a JSON parsing error if I try to do JSON.parse(someValue) in my code
I don't know if this will work, but I can't format a comment appropriately enough to get the point across so see if this will work:
someValue=[{"someValue":"Here is a really\
really long piece which\
should be split into multiple lines"}]
Where "\" should escape the newline similar to how you can write long bash commands while escaping the newline. I'm not certain the .env interpreter will support it though.
EDIT
Looks like this won't work. This syntax was actually proposed, but I don't think it was incorporated. See motdotla/dotenv#333 (which is what Vue uses to parse .env).
Like #zero298 said, this isn't possible. Likely you could delimit the entry with a character that wouldn't show up normally in the text (^ is a good candidate), then parse it within the application using string.replace('^', '\n');
I'm trying to write a simple multi-line Alias that says several predefined strings of characters in mIRC. The problem is that the strings can contain:
{
}
|
which are all used in the scripting language to group sections of code/commands. So I was wondering if there was an escape character I could use.
In lack of that, is there a method, or alternative way to be able to "say" multiple lines of these strings, so that this:
alias test1 {
/msg # samplestring}contains_chars|
/msg # _that|break_continuity}{
}
Outputs this on typing /test1 on a channel:
<MyName> samplestring}contains_chars|
<MyName> _that|break_continuity}{
It doesn't have to use the /msg command specifically, either, as long as the output is the same.
So basically:
Is there an escape character of sorts I can use to differentiate code from a string in mIRC scripting?
Is there a way to tell a script to evaluate all characters in a string as a literal? Think " " quotes in languages like Java.
Is the above even possible using only mIRC scripting?
"In lack of that, is there a method, or alternative way to be able to "say" multiple lines of these strings, so that this:..."
I think you have to have to use msg # every time when you want to message a channel. Alterativelty you can use the /say command to message the active window.
Regarding the other 3 questions:
Yes, for example you can use $chr(123) instead of a {, $chr(125) instead of a } and $chr(124) instead of a | (pipe). For a full list of numbers you can go to http://www.atwebresults.com/ascii-codes.php?type=2. The code for a dot is 46 so $chr(46) will represent a dot.
I don't think there is any 'simple' way to do this. To print identifiers as plain text you have to add a ! after the $. For example '$!time' will return the plain text '$time' as $time will return the actual value of $time.
Yes.
In my Objective-C code for my GPUImage framework, I have the following macro:
#define STRINGIZE(x) #x
#define STRINGIZE2(x) STRINGIZE(x)
#define SHADER_STRING(text) # STRINGIZE2(text)
which allows me to inline multiline vertex and fragment shaders as NSString literals within my custom filter subclasses, like this:
NSString *const kGPUImagePassthroughFragmentShaderString = SHADER_STRING
(
varying highp vec2 textureCoordinate;
uniform sampler2D inputImageTexture;
void main()
{
gl_FragColor = texture2D(inputImageTexture, textureCoordinate);
}
);
GPUImage needs this in order to provide formatted vertex and fragment shaders that are included in the body text of filter subclasses. Shipping them as separate files would make the framework unable to be compiled into a static library. Using the above macro, I can make these shaders able to be copied and pasted between the framework code and external shader files without a ridiculous amount of reformatting work.
Swift does away with compiler macros, and the documentation has this to say:
Complex macros are used in C and Objective-C but have no counterpart
in Swift. Complex macros are macros that do not define constants,
including parenthesized, function-like macros. You use complex macros
in C and Objective-C to avoid type-checking constraints or to avoid
retyping large amounts of boilerplate code. However, macros can make
debugging and refactoring difficult. In Swift, you can use functions
and generics to achieve the same results without any compromises.
Therefore, the complex macros that are in C and Objective-C source
files are not made available to your Swift code.
Per the line "In Swift, you can use functions and generics to achieve the same results without any compromises", is there a way in Swift to provide multiline string literals without resorting to a string of concatenation operations?
Alas Swift multiline strings are still not available, as far as I know. However when doing some research regarding this, I found a workaround which could be useful. It is a combination of these items:
A Quick Hack to Quote Swift Strings in a Playground - Describing how to make an service replacing and fixing texts
The comment by pyrtsa, regarding using "\n".join(...) to emulate the multiline strings
Setup an automated service
Using Automator you could set up an extra service with the following properties:
A single action of "Run Shell Script"
Tick off the "Output replaces selected text"
Change shell to /usr/bin/perl
Add the code excerpt below to the action window
Save as something like "Replace with quoted swift multiline join"
Code excerpt
print "\"\\n\".join([\n"; # Start a join operation
# For each line, reformat and print
while(<>) {
print " "; # A little indentation
chomp; # Loose the newline
s/([\\\"])/\\$1/g; # Replace \ and " with escaped variants
print "\"$_\""; # Add quotes around the line
print "," unless eof # Add a comma, unless it is the last line
print "\n"; # End the line, preserving original line count
}
print " ])"; # Close the join operation
You are of course free to use whatever shell and code you want, I chose perl as that is familiar to me, and here are some comments:
I used the "\n".join(...) version to create the multiline string, you could use the extension answer from Swift - Split string over multiple lines, or even the + variant, I'll leave that as an exercise for the user
I opted for a little indentation with spaces, and to replace the \ and " to make it a little sturdier
Comments are of course optional, and you could probably shorten the code somewhat. I tried to opt for clarity and readability
The code, as is, preserves spaces, but you could be edited if that is not wanted. Also left as an exercise for the user
Usage of service
Open up your playground or code editor, and insert/write some multline text:
Mark the text block
Execute Xcode (or similar) > Services > Replace with quoted swift multiline join
You now have a multiline string in proper swift coding. Here are an example of before and after text:
Here is my multiline text
example with both a " and
a \ within the text
"\n".join([
"Here is my multiline text ",
"example with both a \" and",
"a \\ within the text"
])
It looks like your end goal is to avoid including standalone shader files?
If so one technique would be to write a quick command line utility that generates a .swift file of string constants representing the shader functions in a certain folder.
Include the resulting .swift file in your project and you have no runtime penalty, and even easier debugging if you generate the code nicely.
Would probably take less than an hour, never need macros again for shaders.