Using signature file in script - f#

I like using .fsi signature files to control visibility. However, if I have both Foo.fsi and Foo.fs files in my solution, and #load "Foo.fs" in a script, it doesn't seem like the corresponding signature file gets used. If I do:
#load "Foo.fsi"
#load "Foo.fs"
... then the desired visibility control happens. Is this the recommended way to achieve this, or is there a better way to do it? In a perfect world, one would like to see the signature file automatically loaded, too.

Not a final answer, but a better way.
From reading Expert F# 4.0 one can do
#load "Foo.fsi" "Foo.fs" "Foo.fsx"
All three loads are on one line.
TL;DR
The link to the book is via WolrdCat just put in a zip code and it will show you locations near there where the book can be found.

Related

What is the recommended way to make & load a library?

I want to make a small "library" to be used by my future maxima scripts, but I am not quite sure on how to proceed (I use wxMaxima). Maxima's documentation covers the save(), load() and loadFile() functions, yet does not provide examples. Therefore, I am not sure whether I am using the proper/best way or not. My current solution, which is based on this post, stores my library in the *.lisp format.
As a simple example, let's say that my library defines the cosSin(x) function. I open a new session and define this function as
(%i0) cosSin(x) := cos(x) * sin(x);
I then save it to a lisp file located in the /tmp/ directory.
(%i1) save("/tmp/lib.lisp");
I then open a new instance of maxima and load the library
(%i0) loadfile("/tmp/lib.lisp");
The cosSin(x) is now defined and can be called
(%i1) cosSin(%pi/4)
(%o1) 1/2
However, I noticed that a substantial number of the libraries shipped with maxima are of *.mac format: the /usr/share/maxima/5.37.2/share/ directory contains 428 *.mac files and 516 *.lisp files. Is it a better format? How would I generate such files?
More generally, what are the different ways a library can be saved and loaded? What is the recommended approach?
Usually people put the functions they need in a file name something.mac and then load("something.mac"); loads the functions into Maxima.
A file can contain any number of functions. A file can load other files, so if you have somethingA.mac and somethingB.mac, then you can have another file that just says load("somethingA.mac"); load("somethingB.mac");.
One can also create Lisp files and load them too, but it is not required to write functions in Lisp.
Unless you are specifically interested in writing Lisp functions, my advice is to write your functions in the Maxima language and put them in a file, using an ordinary text editor. Also, I recommend that you don't use save to save the functions to a file as Lisp code; just type the functions into a file, as Maxima code, with a plain text editor.
Take a look at the files in share to get a feeling for how other people have gone about it. I am looking right now at share/contrib/ggf.mac and I see it has a lengthy comment header describing its purpose -- such comments are always a good idea.
For principiants, like me,
Menu Edit:configure:Startup commands
Copy all the functions you have verified in the first box (this will write your wxmaxima-init.mac in the location indicated below)
Restart Wxmaxima.
Now you can access the functions whitout any load() command

How to create and load a configuration file in dxl

I have a script which saves some files at a given location. It works fine but when I send this code to someone else, he has to change the paths in the code. It's not comfortable for someone who does not know what is in that code and for me to explain every time where and how the code should be changed.
I want to get this path in a variable which will be taken from the configuration file. So it will be easier for everyone to change just this config file and nothing in my code. But I have never done this before and could not find any information on how I can do this in the internet.
PS: I do not have any code and I ask about an ultimate solution but it is really difficult to find something good in the internet about dxl, especially since I'm new with that. Maybe someone of you already does that or has an idea how it could be done?
DXL has a perm to read the complete context of a file into a variable: string readFile (string) (or Buffer readFile (string))
you can split the output by \n and then use regular expressions to find all lines that match the pattern
^\s*([^;#].*)\s*=\s*(.*)\s*$
(i.e. key = value - where comment lines start with ; or #)
But in DOORS I prefer using DOORS modules as configuration modules. Object Heading can be the key, Object Text can be the value.
Hardcode the full name of the configuration module into your DXL file and the user can modify the behaviour of the application.
The advantage over a file is that you need not make assumptions on where the config file is to be stored on the file system.
It really depends on your situation. You are going to need to be a little more specific about what you mean by "they need to change the paths in the code". What are these paths to? Are they DOORS module paths, are they paths to local/network files, or are the something else entirely?
Like user3329561 said, you COULD use a DOORS module as a configuration file. I wouldn't recommend it though, simply because that is not what DOORS modules were designed for. DOORS is fully capable of reading system files in one line at a time as well as all at once, but I can't recommend that option either until I know what types of paths you want to load and why.
I suspect that there is a better solution for your problem that will present itself once more information is provided.
I had the same problem, I needed to specify the path of my configuration file used in my dxl script.
I solved this issue passing the directory path as a parameter to DOORS.exe as follow:
"...\DOORS\9.3\bin\doors.exe" -dxl "string myVar = \"Hello Word\"
then in my dxl script, the variable myVar is a global variable.

Getting FXAA to work

I am new to HLSL and in all of the tutorials I found there always seems to be a #include "Fxaa3_11.fxh" in each of them. I include this file and then it also makes a reference to another header file #include "Fxaa3_11.h" and as it goes I also include this file into my content pipeline and still gives me an error X1507: failed to open source file:... whichever way I go.
Is there any way to make a clean, single FXAA.fx file without enabling all this mess of external files?
If you want to compile your shader on the fly , you can use this function
Most important part when using includes is to provide a CompilerIncludeHandler ,include resolves are not automatically done for you (which is a good thing).
You override the open method, then read the include path from the parameters and return the content as a string.
If you just want to have if processed in content manager, Easiest way is probably just to copy paste the content of those header files in the main shader file (where the include is), and delete the include statement. Bit ugly but pretty simple.

In rails.vim why do I get "E345 can't find file in path" errors?

I've been learning Ruby/Rails with vim. Tim Pope's rails.vim seems like a really good tool to traverse files with, but I keep getting these pesky "E345 can't find file in path" errors. I'm not vim expert yet, so the solution isn't obvious. Additionally, I've tried this and it doesn't apply to my problem.
As an example of the problem. I have a method format_name defined in app/helpers/application_helper.rb and it is used in app/helpers/messages_helper.rb. Within the latter file I put my cursor over the usage of format_name and then hit gf and I get that error. Similar disfunction with commands like ]f and [f
However, it works sometimes. I was able to gf from user to the app/models/user.rb
Ideas?
I think that is a limitation of rails.vim. It does not support “finding” bare methods. Supporting something like that would require one of the following:
an exhaustive search of all the source files for each “find” request
(which could be expensive with large projects),
“dumb” indexing of method names
(e.g. Exuberant Ctags and gControl-]; see :help g_CTRL-]), or
smart enough parsing of the code to make a good guess where the method might be defined
(which is hard to do properly).
If you know where the method is, you can extend many of the navigation commands with a method name:
:Rhelper application#format_name
But, you do not have to type all of that in. Assuming the cursor is on format_name you can probably just type:RhTabspaceappTab#Control-R Control-W (see :help c_CTRL-R_CTRL-W).

Erlang: using include from the console?

The include directive is usually used for a .hrl file at the top of an .erl file.
But, I would like to use include from the Erlang console directly.
I am trying to use some functions in a module. I have compiled the erl file from the console. But, the functions I want to use do not work without access to the hrl file.
Any suggestions?
"But, the functions I want to use do not work without access to the hrl file."
This can't be true, but from this I'll take a shot at guessing that you want access to records in the hrl file that you don't (normally) have in the shell.
If you do rr(MODULE) you will load all records defined in MODULE(including those defined in an include file included by MODULE).
Then you can do everything you need to from the shell.
(Another thing you may possibly want for testing is to add the line -compile(export_all) to your erl file. Ugly, but good sometimes for testing.)
Have you tried the compile:file option? You can pass a list of modules to be included thus:
compile:file("myfile.erl", [{i, "/path/1/"}, {i, "/path/2/"}])
It's worth nothing that jsonerl.hrl doesn't contain any functions. It contains macros. As far as I know, macros are a compile-time-only construct in Erlang.
The easiest way to make them available would be to create a .erl file yourself that actually declares functions that are implemented in terms of the macro. Maybe something like this:
-module(jsonerl_helpers).
-include("jsonerl.hrl").
record_to_struct_f(RecordName, Record) ->
?record_to_struct(RecordName, Record).
... which, after you compile, you could call as:
jsonerl_helpers:record_to_struct_f(RecordName, Record)
I don't know why the author chose to implement those as macros; it seems odd, but I'm sure he had his reasons.

Resources