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.
Related
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.
I've got MMM-mode set up to edit .html.erb files, but indentation does not work in the ruby sections, and all the different electric behaviours of ruby-mode do the wrong thing. I've changed this sub-mode from ruby-moode to fundamental-mode, and it works much better.
I want to still use ruby-mode's font-locking though, is this possible/easy? Any hints on where to start.
Elisp is comfortable to me, but I don't have too much time right now to dig too deeply myself. Hopefully someone will have a snippet?
I see you haven't yet found an answer. Dunno whether it will be better for this, but you might consider using MuMaMo instead of MMM.
To answer the question, you would define a major mode deriving from fundamental-mode, and in its body just copy the font-lock-related lines from the ruby-mode definition body, the ones setting font-lock- variables and also syntax-propertize-function. Naturally , you need to (require 'ruby-mode) somewhere.
But for .html.erb files I can now recommend using mmm-erb, which was not available when this question was asked.
I work on a huge script in \latex.
I want to be able to compile each of the chapters as stand-alone, because it is easier for hacking sessions with Latex.
On the other hand, I would like to maintain a document which encompasses the whole script so far written.
I do not know how to maintain both these documents without permanently annoying overhead, as a tex-file can either be written stand-alone or to be included.
It would be great help to have something a Latex-preprocessor available that is capable of C-like #define and #ifdef-#else-#endif statements. This would facilitate writing to a great extent. Do you know whether something like this exists in latex, or how can you do something equivalent? Google hasn't supplied me with a satisfying answer to this.
EDIT:
Some remarks in order to avoid misunderstandings: I am aware of the very simple built-in TEX-preprocessor, but these commands don't work properly as I expected. Hence a reference to these will not help me out.
The chapters in my script shall look something like this (Pseudo-Code)
IF being_just_included defined
%No header here, and document has already begun
ELSE
\input{common_header.tex} %Header things all my documents use
\begin{document}
ENDIF
%%% Lots of stuff
IF being_just_included defined
%Nothing to do here
ELSE
\end{document}
END IF
In contrast, my complete script source file should look like this
\input{common_header.tex}
DEFINE being_just_included
\begin{document}
\input{preamble.tex}
\input{first_chapter.tex}
\input{second_chapter.tex}
\input{third_chapter.tex}
\end{document}
Could you post a code which performs something like this?
Thank you very much for this package and the hint to the forum.
After some time I've figured out there exists a tex preprocessor, which is similar to the CPP. Maybe not well-engineered, but it serves my purpose quite well.
The magic lines are:
\def\justbeingincluded{justbeingincluded}
\ifx\justbeingincluded\undefined
\fi
to be used appropiatly within the respective source files.
One way of doing this is to use the standalone package, intended for this specific purpose.
You may also care to browse through, and perhaps join, TeX and Friends.
I would like to globally prevent LaTeX from hyphenating 'Objective-C'. I am aware of the \hyphenation command, but I don't see how I can make use of it. If I pass 'Objective-C' to this command, the dash will be treated as a hint to hyphenate the word there.
One solution I found is wrapping Objective-C into an mbox each time I use it. However, the document I am writing contains this name a lot, and wrapping it into an mbox each time is ugly (as is defining a command and using this over and over again in the source code).
Why is defining a new command ugly? It's how \LaTeX\ defines itself.
\def\ObjectiveC{\mbox{Objective-C}}
Use \nobreakdash. That's what LyX produces when I insert a nonbreakingdash and convert it to tex.
As suggested here, you could define a command like this:
\newcommand\dash{\nobreakdash-\hspace{0pt}}
and use it like this
Consider the $n$\dash dimensional manifold ...
Also, you could use the babel package and use "~ as a protected hyphen. I'm not sure if using babel is advisable when writing in english, though.
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.