Company i work develops a new programming language which will ease job of engineer. My job is to supply this language with a nice editor which is also involves code folding. I need to have custom code folding which is not include "{" and "}". I am working with Geany filetypes. I add new filetype. I want to fold some structure like below.
if %condition% then for each %element% in %range% do
%statement% %statement%
else if %condition% then end for
%statement%
else
end if
I know my language far from c type , however add such line to my code for enabling syntax coloring.
[settings]
lexer_filetype=C
Any kind of help will be appreciated.
I dont know exact answer but i know how i can dig it up. As far there is no an answer i am going to write how can the answer can be appeared. Using scintilla and its lexers can take us to solution of this problem. Both Geany and Scintilla documentations mention about support of that feature.
Under Debian :
cp /usr/share/geany/filetypes.c ~/.config/geany/filedefs/
chown myUser:myGroup ~/.config/geany/filedefs/filetypes.c
Edit the file. Under the section [lexer_properties] add the line:
fold.cpp.comment.explicit=1
Save the file.
Open geany. You are now able to put userfoldings using the default //{ and //} delimiters in c and in cpp. These do not influence your code because to c and cpp it are comments.
Related
After googling a bit it seems there is no multi-line comment support in Erlang, is this really the case?
And if so, why?
I know some editors support commenting out regions (adding % first on every line of the region) but i don't really want to pick editor based on this.
It's simple. Use preprocessor:
-ifdef(comment).
Something to comment
You can add text or
function(Declaration) ->
...
Which will removed from file
-endif.
There are no multi-line comments in Erlang.
In general, I haven't found this to be a big deal: I use templates for gen_server and supervisor and a general template for other modules, and all of these include the boilerplate top doc blocks. I get some template support from my editor (Emacs) but you could be editor-agnostic and just write some templates and copy them to any new modules you want.
The biggest use of multi-line comments other than documentation is to comment-out a big chunk of code. Since your Erlang code should generally be small functions, you can just comment out the function call, which is a one-line comment.
There are too many text editors, which have the function, that if I just select a piece of the code and press the quote/bracket key, the selected code becomes wrapped into the type of the quotes/brackets I pressed. But do you know any or are you using any, which has also the function, that if I select the piece of the code wrapped into the quotes/brackets and press the same quote/bracket key or some key combination, that piece of code becomes unwrapped?
Also if you know any editor or popular editor extension that automatically remove all quotes/brackets from the code, please write it too. Everything would be helpful.
We are doing some research and this question is still unanswered. Please help us if you know anything about.
I create a simple Zeus (Windows) Lua script that does this for the quote case (i.e. the macro wraps any marked area in quotes).
In a similar fashion another script could be written for the brackets case.
Also as this simple script shows, this should be possible in any scriptable editor.
The script can be found here: http://www.zeusedit.com/zforum/viewtopic.php?t=7148
SynWrite editor (Windows) can do scripting for u. You can write Python plugin in 10min, and assign it a hotkey, so selection (or all text) will dequote, or what ever.
Finally, I've made it by writing my own extension to my favourite editor.
I am running Notepad++ 5.8.5 on Windows 7, editing Perl programs.
I would like to comment out a block of text lines (and later, perhaps, uncomment it).
None of the following works:
CTRL+K, CTRL+Q, CTRL+shift+K, CTRL+shift+Q,
selecting the block of lines and going to the menu: edit-> Comment/Uncomment -> Block Comment
none of the above has any effect.
What to do?
Is NP++ interpreting your file as Perl or plain text?
If NP++ is treating your file as plain text, then language specific things like that won't work.
You may want to double-check that as described here.
Why not try updating to a newer version? That's horribly out of date (a year old).
Define your own language to match to the file extension, in your case it is: txt
and then define any comment style you want. Then close and open NP++ again. Enjoy!
Path: Language--->Define your Language --> Comments & Number tab
Hank Wei
Could someone provide a simple example using getopt.pas with short and long command line switches use case?
Getopt.pas is a delphi unit for parsing command line switches.
I've found more than one version of it.
from fpc http://www.koders.com/delphi/fid428067C2ABEF87A674F64BF48FD6E2278E322A18.aspx
The following is another SO question regarding this subject but no example is given; beside it this links to a source that alike the previous links is not self-contained
Is there an implementation of "getopt" for Delphi?
Here is a demo of the GPC code that you link to: getoptdemo.pas [koders.com]
I need a way to add text comments in "Word style" to a Latex document. I don't mean to comment the source code of the document. What I want is a way to add corrections, suggestions, etc. to the document, so that they don't interrupt the text flow, but that would still make it easy for everyone to know, which part of the sentence they are related to. They should also "disappear" when compiling the document for printing.
At first, I thought about writing a new command, that would just forward the input to \marginpar{}, and when compiling for printing would just make the definition empty. The problem is you have no guarantee where the comments will appear and you will not be able to distinguish them from the other marginpars.
Any idea?
todonotes is another package that makes nice looking callouts. You can see a number of examples in the documentation.
Since LaTeX is a text format, if you want to show someone the differences in a way that they can use them (and cherry pick from them) use the standard diff tool (e.g., diff -u orig.tex new.tex > docdiffs). This is the best way to annotate something like LaTeX documents, and can be easily used by anyone involved in the production of a document from LaTeX sources. You can then use standard LaTeX comments in your patch to explain the changes, and they can be very easily integrated. If the document lives in a version control system of some sort, just use the VCS to generate a patch file that can be reviewed.
I have used changes.sty, which gives basic change colouring:
\added{new text}
\deleted{old text}
\replaced{new text}{old text}
All of these take an optional parameter with the initials of the author who did this change. This results in different colours used, and these initials are displayed superscripted after the changed text.
\replaced[MI]{new text}{old text}
You can hide the change marks by giving the option final to the changes package.
This is very basic, and comments are not supported, but it might help.
My little home-rolled "fixme" tool uses \marginpar where possible and goes inline in places (like captions) where that is hard to arrange. This works out because I don't often use margin paragraphs for other things. This does mean you can't finalize the layout until everything is fixed, but I don't feel much pain from that...
Other than that I heartily agree with Michael about using standard tools and version control.
See also:
Tips for collaboratively editing a LaTeX document (which addresses you main question...)
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/193298/best-practices-in-latex
and a self-plug:
How do I get Emacs to fill sentences, but not paragraphs?
You could also try the trackchanges package.
You can use the changebar package to highlight areas of text that have been affected.
If you don't want to do the markup manually (which can be tedious and interrupt the flow of editing) the neat latexdiff utility will take a diff of your document and produce a version of it with markup added to visually display the changes between the two versions in the typeset output.
This would be my preferred solution, although I haven't tested it out on large, multi-file documents.
The best package I know is Easy Review that provides the commenting functionality into LaTeX environment. For example, you can use the following simple commands such as \add{NEW TEXT}, \remove{OLD TEXT}, \replace{OLD TEXT}{NEW TEXT}, \comment{TEXT}{COMMENT}, \highlight{TEXT}, and \alert{TEXT}.
Some examples can be found here.
The todonotes package looks great, but if that proves too cumbersome to use, a simple solution is just to use footnotes (e.g. in red to separate them from regular footnotes).
Package trackchanges.sty works exactly the way changes.sty. See #Svante's reply.
It has easy to remember commands and you can change how edits will appear after compiling the document. You can also hide the edits for printing.