Is there a way to do so ? I searched Google but couldn't find any answer, so I guess the answer would be no. Is there anything close ? If not, would it be easy to extend red-lang to do so ?
From http://www.rebol.com/docs/setup.html
Startup Scripts
When REBOL starts it will automatically run the rebol.r and user.r files, if they exist.
The system looks for these files first in the current directory (or the directory of the script being run), then in the directory that contains the REBOL executable program.
Note that REBOL/Core runs fine without the rebol.r and user.r files. They simply provide an easy way to include additional code and data on startup, such as your network preferences.
If you compile your own Red interpreter you can add an autoloading file, maybe in console.red after system/console/init "Red Console" and before system/console/launch Best advice is to ask on the https://gitter.im/red/help site to ask for help. I guess this was already discussed.
Related
I have found a plugin (EELSTools.gtk from http://www.dmscripting.com) which I want to modify.
The plugin contains nearly every function I need, but I want also to integrate some extra functions.
Does anyone know how to open .gtk files?
You can't and shouldn't.
*.gtk files are packages files with the purpose of encapsulation. This might either be because of convenience, but it might as well be, because the author does not want to make the code open-source. (Note that there are some proprietory plugins as well, they are also .gtk files.)
If you have found a plugin and want to expand on it, the best way forward is to contact the plugin-author.
The *.gtk files get loaded before *.s files. If you install your own script from DM Menu Install Script File or Install Script, you can add it to the menu that the *.gtk file has, e.g. EELSTools. It is added at the end of the list. For example, I put a measure ZLP width script in EELSTools.
I have two files:
black.less
/* imports */
#import "elements.less";
#import "crush.less";
#import "tree.less";
I'm using the less watch functionality by adding:
less.watch();
Sure enough I can see the traffic getting black.less. Black.less hasn't changed though so any change in any of the files being imported is not counted as a change and the style is not updated.
If I however touch black.less the style updates as it should.
Is there a way to automatically update regardless of if it's an imported file or the actual less file being added to the page i.e. so that I only have to change let's say tree.less.
/K
I use Grunt and the grunt-contrib-less plugin to watch all of my less files and compile them into CSS as they change.
Then I use live.js in the browser to watch the CSS files.
The advantage to doing it this way is that I can do the same thing with my HTML and JS files, as well as run tests, lint my JS files, etc.
Remy Sharp recently wrote a post about how newer versions of Chrome support the ability to save files that you edit in the dev tools back to the file system.
He advocates Never having to leave devtools. Just do your edits right in the browser. The advantage to this solution for you is that you could continue to use the client-side Less compiler.
(I still like my robust text editors and command-line too much to ditch them entirely, but thought this answer would likely appeal to at least a few people who arrived at this question.)
Here's another quick way.
watch -n 1 touch black.less
This may be too late for op, but I had the same question and maybe others have it too.
less-watch-compiler will watch a directory (and sub-directories) for changes and compile any less code to a destination folder. The cool bit is that you can specify the main file and only the main file will be compiled when any file in the source directory is changed.
Usage:
less-watch-compiler [options] <source_dir> <destination_dir> [main-file]
I'm working with gendarme for .net called by Sonar (launched by Jenkins).
I've a lot of AvoidVisibleFieldsRule violations. The main violations are found in the generated files. As I can't do anything on it, i would like to exclude *.designer.cs from the scan.
I can't find a way to do that. There is a properties in Sonar to exclude generated files but it doesn't seem to be applied for gendarme.
Is there a way to do such a thing ?
Thanks for all
Gendarme expects you provide an ignore list,
http://www.mono-project.com/Gendarme.FAQ
https://github.com/mono/mono-tools/blob/master/gendarme/self-test.ignore
The ignore file format is bit of weird, but you can learn it by experiments.
Indeed that is actually not normal at all. Generated code is excluded by the plugin with the standard configuration. What version of the C# plugins are you using ?
Anyway, the configuration property you can try is "sonar.exclusions" (see http://docs.codehaus.org/display/SONAR/Advanced+parameters).
If you do not solve your problem right away, the best thing would be to drop a mail to the user mailing list (see http://www.sonarsource.org/support/support/) and send the verbose output of your build. To get this output simply add "-X" to the command line.
Hope it helps
I have a DCL script on VMS which calls a perl script. Is there a VMS/DCL command I can use that will tell me every file handle opened by the perl script?
Set default to the disk the app runs from (or you might have to try each disk in succession if it's a really large or distributed app). Then the command is
show device/files/nosystem
If you're on a more recent version of VMS and the lists are too long, you can pipe it with a search by doing this:
pipe show device/files/nosystem | search sys$input (name of perl script)
You need to find the documentation for undocumented VMS features :-)
Seriously I think that set watch might do what you want. If you issue
$ set watch file/class=(all,nodump)
$ perl yourperlscript.pl
You will get loads of output that will hopefully include what you want. I havent done it for years, you probably tune the options to fine tune it. See
http://www.parsec.com/openvms/undocumented.php?page=13
Jason, I need more clarification for a). Are you saying that you want to run your perl script in a batch file and have the batch file monitor the files being accessed by the perl script? Or something else?
Hmm, not sure about that. Maybe add a linux tag to your post so that some linux people can see this and chime in. I'm not sure why your perl program wouldn't know what files it opened. It's your program, wouldn't it access the files you told it to access? Or if you're computing the filenames somehow (which I've done in cobol, but still know at least which directory to find them in, and what naming scheme they use), you'd still have clues like what I mention. Also, since it's your program, and if you're computing the filenames, coudn't you also make your Perl program output it's own little report of what the files were? Like, just after it computes the filename, have it copy the name string to a separate report file.
I've been trying to figure out if there is already an accepted method for testing file io operations in Haskell, but I have yet to find any information that is useful for what I am trying to do.
I'm writing a small library that performs various file system operations (recursively traverse a directory and return a list of all files; sync multiple directories so that each directory contains the same files using inodes as the equality test and hardlinks...) and I want to make sure that they actually work, but the only way I can think of to test them is to create a temporary directory with a known structure and compare the results from the functions executed on this temporary directory with the known results. The thing is, I would like to get as much test coverage as possible while still being mainly automated: I don't want to have create the directory structure by hand.
I have searched google and hackage, but the packages that I have seen on hackage do not use any testing -- maybe I just picked the wrong ones -- and anything I find on google does not deal with IO testing.
Any help would be appreciated
Thanks, James
Maybe you can find a way to make this work for you.
EDIT:
the packages that I have seen on hackage do not use any testing
I have found an unit testing framework for Haskell on Hackage. Including this framework, maybe you could use assertions to verify that the files you require are present in the directories that you want them to be and they correspond to their intended purpose.
HUnit is the usual library for IO-based tests. I don't know of a set of properties/combinators for file actions -- that would be useful.
There is no reason why your test code cannot create a temporary directory, and check its contents after running your impure code.
If you want mainly automated testing of monadic code, you might want to look into Monadic QuickCheck. You can write down properties that you think should be true, such as
If you create a file with read permission, it will be possible to open the file for reading.
If you remove a file, it won't open.
Whatever else you think of...
QuickCheck will then generate random tests.