I usually use Geany or Hi-Tide under Debian (GNU/Linux) for firmware development, mainly C (but also reading old assembler). I document code using single-line comments, and it really annoys me when I retype something and have to manually re-break every following line to keep it in the 80-character margin.
Is there a text editor that can re-wrap consecutive single-line comments (and do this automatically while I type)? That is, given:
/// This is a really long line that should have been wrapped at "that" but was not.
/// This sentence is in the same
/// paragraph as the last.
...I want an editor that will re-wrap this to
/// This is a really long line that
/// should have been wrapped at "that"
/// but was not. This sentence is in
/// the same paragraph as the last.
...preferably doing this sensibly while I type.
I've tried:
Hi-Tide (based on Eclipse 3.3)
Geany
jEdit
UniversalIndentGUI + a bunch of prettifiers (I couldn't find any formatters that worked, and it's not a great workflow either)
GVim - next line begins //should have been... instead of /// should have been...
Update: just to elaborate on my accepted answer - I've gone with the snapshot emacs and an extra filladapt mode was also required
In Emacs, to start automatic wrapping, enter auto-fill-mode. To set the line width, run C-u ⟨columns⟩ C-x f.
Emacs, or really CC Mode, will anticipate your commenting structure, so that typing
/// This is a really long line that shoul will result in
/// This is a really long line that
/// shoul‸
And you can refill a paragraph at any time with M-q.
If you want to do refills automatically with each keypress, well there may well be some interal command or third-party library out there, but off-hand you can use this elisp code:
;;; Can't advise SELF-INSERT-COMMAND, so create a wrapper procedure.
(defun self-insert-refill (n)
(interactive "p")
(self-insert-command n))
;;; Advise SELF-INSERT-REFILL to execute FILL-PARAGRAPH after every
;;; keypress, but *only* if we're inside a comment
(defadvice self-insert-refill (after refill-paragraph)
(let ((face (or (get-char-property (point) 'read-face-name)
(get-char-property (point) 'face))) )
(if (and (eq face 'font-lock-comment-face)
(not (string= " " (this-command-keys)))) ; Spaces would get deleted on refill.
(fill-paragraph))))
(ad-activate 'self-insert-refill)
(add-hook 'c-mode-hook
;; Remap SELF-INSERT-COMMAND to be SELF-INSERT-REFILL.
(local-set-key [remap self-insert-command] 'self-insert-refill) ))
This is probably not very robust or in keeping with best-practice, and likely not wholly satisfactory, as it won't work for general editing, e.g. C-d and backspace, and it slows down the editor somewhat, but it's a start.
Vim most certainly can do this.
First, you need to tell Vim that "///" is a comment prefix (it isn't by default):
:set comments^=:///
If you want wrapping to occur as-you-type, set your preferred textwidth:
:set textwidth=80
To format existing paragraphs, use any variation of the gq command. For example, you could:
Select a paragraph visually and type gq, or
Type gqj to re-wrap from the current line to the end of the paragraph
Related
Suppose in a (wx)Maxima session I have the following
f:sin(x);
df:diff(f,x);
Now I want to have it output a text file containing something like, for example
If $f(x)=\sin(x)$, then $f^\prime(x)=\cos(x)$.
I found the tex and tex1 functions but I think I need some additional string processing to be able to do what I want.
Any help appreciated.
EDIT: Further clarifications.
Auto Multiple Choice is a software that helps you create and manage questionaires. To declare questions one may use LaTeX syntax. From AMC's documentation, a question looks like this:
\element{geographie}{
\begin{question}{Cameroon}
Which is the capital city of Cameroon?
\begin{choices}
\correctchoice{Yaoundé}
\wrongchoice{Douala}
\wrongchoice{Abou-Dabi}
\end{choices}
\end{question}
}
As can be seen, it is just LaTeX. Now, with a little modification, I can turn this example into a math question
\element{derivatives}{
\begin{question}{trig_fun_diff_1}
If $f(x)=\sin(x)$ then $f^\prime(0)$ is
\begin{choices}
\correctchoice{$1$}
\wrongchoice{$-1$}
\wrongchoice{$0$}
\end{choices}
\end{question}
}
This is the sort of output I want. I'll have, say, a list of functions then execute a loop calculating their derivatives and so on.
OK, in response to your updated question. My advice is to work with questions and answers as expressions -- build up your list of questions first, and then when you have the list in the structure that you want, then output the TeX file as the last step. It is generally much clearer and simpler to work with expressions than with strings.
E.g. Here is a simplistic approach. I'll use defstruct to define a structure so that I can refer to its parts by name.
defstruct (question (name, datum, item, correct, incorrect));
myq1 : new (question);
myq1#name : "trig_fun_diff_1";
myq1#datum : f(x) = sin(x);
myq1#item : 'at ('diff (f(x), x), x = 0);
myq1#correct : 1;
myq1#incorrect : [0, -1];
You can also write
myq1 : question ("trig_fun_diff_1", f(x) = sin(x),
'at ('diff (f(x), x), x = 0), 1, [0, -1]);
I don't know which form is more convenient for you.
Then you can make an output function similar to this:
tex_question (q, output_stream) :=
(printf (output_stream, "\\begin{question}{~a}~%", q#name),
printf (output_stream, "If $~a$, then $~a$ is:~%", tex1 (q#datum), tex1 (q#item)),
printf (output_stream, "\\begin{choices}~%"),
/* make a list comprising correct and incorrect here */
/* shuffle the list (see random_permutation) */
/* output each correct or incorrect here */
printf (output_stream, "\\end{choices}~%"),
printf (output_stream, "\\end{question}~%));
where output_stream is an output stream as returned by openw (which see).
It may take a little bit of trying different stuff to get derivatives to be output in just the format you want. My advice is to put the logic for that into the output function.
A side effect of working with expressions is that it is straightforward to output some representations other than TeX (e.g. plain text, XML, HTML). That might or might not become important for your project.
Well, tex is the TeX output function. It can be customized to some extent via texput (which see).
As to post-processing via string manipulation, I don't recommend it. However, if you want to go down that road, there are regex functions which you can access via load(sregex). Unfortunately it's not yet documented; see the comment header of sregex.lisp (somewhere in your Maxima installation) for examples.
I need to remove all \text generated by TeXForm in Mathematica.
What I am doing now is this:
MyTeXForm[a_]:=StringReplace[ToString[TeXForm[a]], "\\text" -> ""]
But the result keeps the braces, for example:
for a=fx,
the result of TeXForm[a] is \text{fx}
the result of MyTeXForm[a] is {fx}
But what I would like is it to be just fx
You should be able to use string patterns. Based on http://reference.wolfram.com/mathematica/tutorial/StringPatterns.html, something like the following should work:
MyTeXForm[a_]:=StringReplace[ToString[TeXForm[a]], "\\text{"~~s___~~"}"->s]
I don't have Mathematica handy right now, but this should say 'Match "\text{" followed by zero or more characters that are stored in the variable s, followed by "}", then replace all of that with whatever is stored in s.'
UPDATE:
The above works in the simplest case of there being a single "\text{...}" element, but the pattern s___ is greedy, so on input a+bb+xx+y, which Mathematica's TeXForm renders as "a+\text{bb}+\text{xx}+y", it matches everything between the first "\text{" and last "}" --- so, "bb}+\text{xx" --- leading to the output
In[1]:= MyTeXForm[a+bb+xx+y]
Out[1]= a+bb}+\text{xx+y
A fix for this is to wrap the pattern with Shortest[], leading to a second definition
In[2]:= MyTeXForm2[a_] := StringReplace[
ToString[TeXForm[a]],
Shortest["\\text{" ~~ s___ ~~ "}"] -> s
]
which yields the output
In[3]:= MyTeXForm2[a+bb+xx+y]
Out[3]= a+bb+xx+y
as desired.
Unfortunately this still won't work when the text itself contains a closing brace. For example, the input f["a}b","c}d"] (for some reason...) would give
In[4]:= MyTeXForm2[f["a}b","c}d"]]
Out[4]= f(a$\$b},c$\$d})
instead of "f(a$\}$b,c$\}$d)", which would be the proper processing of the TeXForm output "f(\text{a$\}$b},\text{c$\}$d})".
This is what I did (works fine for me):
MyTeXForm[a_] := ToString[ToExpression[StringReplace[ToString[TeXForm[a]], "\\text" -> ""]][[1]]]
This is a really late reply, but I just came up against the same issue and discovered a simple solution. Put a space between the variables in the Mathematica expression that you wish to convert using TexForm.
For the original poster's example, the following code works great:
a=f x
TeXForm[a]
The output is as desired: f x
Since LaTeX will ignore that space in math mode, things will format correctly.
(As an aside, I was having the same issue with subscripted expressions that have two side-by-side variables in the subscript. Inserting a space between them solved the issue.)
I am using TeXnicCenter to edit a LaTeX document.
I now want to remove a certain tag (say, emph{blabla}} which occurs multiple times in my document , but not tag's content (so in this example, I want to remove all emphasization).
What is the easiest way to do so?
May also be using another program easily available on Windows 7.
Edit: In response to regex suggestions, it is important that it can deal with nested tags.
Edit 2: I really want to remove the tag from the text file, not just disable it.
Using a regular expression do something like s/\\emph\{([^\}]*)\}/\1/g. If you are not familiar with regular expressions this says:
s -- replace
/ -- begin match section
\\emph\{ -- match \emph{
( -- begin capture
[^\}]* -- match any characters except (meaning up until) a close brace because:
[] a group of characters
^ means not or "everything except"
\} -- the close brace
and * means 0 or more times
) -- end capture, because this is the first (in this case only) capture, it is number 1
\} -- match end brace
/ -- begin replace section
\1 -- replace with captured section number 1
/ -- end regular expression, begin extra flags
g -- global flag, meaning do this every time the match is found not just the first time
This is with Perl syntax, as that is what I am familiar with. The following perl "one-liners" will accomplish two tasks
perl -pe 's/\\emph\{([^\}]*)\}/\1/g' filename will "test" printing the file to the command line
perl -pi -e 's/\\emph\{([^\}]*)\}/\1/g' filename will change the file in place.
Similar commands may be available in your editor, but if not this will (should) work.
Crowley should have added this as an answer, but I will do that for him, if you replace all \emph{ with { you should be able to do this without disturbing the other content. It will still be in braces, but unless you have done some odd stuff it shouldn't matter.
The regex would be a simple s/\\emph\{/\{/g but the search and replace in your editor will do that one too.
Edit: Sorry, used the wrong brace in the regex, fixed now.
\renewcommand{\emph}[1]{#1}
any reasonably advanced editor should let you do a search/replace using regular expressions, replacing emph{bla} by bla etc.
I'd like to express the following sentence (source_location is also italic, it's not correctly rendered):
Each entry has a list of tuple: < source_location, R/W, trip_counter, occurrence, killed (explained in the later) >
My current workaround for this is:
$ \left\langle
\textit{source\_location}, \textit{R/W}, \textit{trip\_counter},
\textit{occurrence}, \textit{killed} \text{(explained in the later)}
\right\rangle $
I'm using 2-column paper. This < .. > is too long, but no line break because it is a math. How do I automatically (or manually) put line break in such case? It seems that \left\langle and \right\rangle should be in a single math. So, hard to break into multiple maths.
$<$ and $>$ would be an alternative, but I don't like it.
LaTeX does allow inline maths to break over lines by default, but there are a number of restrictions. Specifically, in your case, using \left...\right puts everything inside a non-breakable math group, so the first step is to replace them with either just plain \langle...\rangle or perhaps \bigl\langle...\bigr\rangle.
However, this still isn't enough to permit linebreaking; usually that's still only allowed after relations or operators, not punctuation such as the comma. (I think this is what's going on anyway; I haven't stopped to look this up.) So you want indicate where allowable line breaks may occur by writing \linebreak[1] after each comma.
Depending how often you have to do this, it may be preferable to write a command to wrap your "tuples" into a nice command. In order to write this in your source:
$ \mytuple{ source\_location, R/W, trip\_counter, occurrence,
killed\upshape (explained in the later) } $
here's a definition of \mytuple that takes all of the above into account:
\makeatletter
\newcommand\mytuple[1]{%
\#tempcnta=0
\bigl\langle
\#for\#ii:=#1\do{%
\#insertbreakingcomma
\textit{\#ii}
}%
\bigr\rangle
}
\def\#insertbreakingcomma{%
\ifnum \#tempcnta = 0 \else\,,\ \linebreak[1] \fi
\advance\#tempcnta\#ne
}
\makeatother
Why not define a new command:
\newcommand{\tuple}[5]{$\langle$\textit{#1}, \textit{#2}, \textit{#3}, \textit{#4},
\textit{#5} (explained in the latter)$\rangle$}
Then use \tuple{sourcelocation}{R/W}{tripcounter}{occurrence}{killed}
There seems to be a package that addresses that problem, called breqn. You can try this and let us know (I haven't used that).
I'd use the align* environment from AMSmath. Furthermore you could just add "\" to break the lines? Should work in math environments, too. Alternatively you could separate the equations.
Use \linebreak inside the math expression wherever you want a new line even between 2 brackets. This will enforce the line to be broken.
vi treats dash - and space as word separators for commands such as dw and cw.
Is there a way to add underscore _ as well?
I quite often want to change part of a variable name containing underscores, such as changing src_branch to dest_branch. I end up counting characters and using s (like 3sdest), but it would be much easier to use cw (like cwdest).
Is there a way to add underscore _ as well?
:set iskeyword-=_
What is, and is not a member character to keywords depends on the language. For help on iskeyword use :help iskeyword.
In case you're using vim, you can change that by setting the iskeyword option (:he iskeyword). If that is not an option, you can always use ct_ instead of counting.
One other good option in such cases is to use camelcasemotion plugin.
It adds new motions ,b, ,e, and ,w, which work analogously with b, e, and w, except that they recognize CamelCase and snake_case words. With it you can use
c,edest
and this will replace "src_branch" with "dest_branch" if your cursor was on first character of "src_branch".
You could type cf_dest_ and save the counting part.
Edit: or as suggested: ct_ changes text until right before the underline character. (I'm using the f motion more, so it came more naturally to me)
Or you could redefine 'iskeyword' (:help iskeyword for details).
I was just looking at this myself and added this to my .vimrc:
set iskeyword=!-~,^*,^45,^124,^34,192-255,^_
My .vimrc had issues with ^| and ^", which was part of the default iskeyword for my setup, so I changed to their ascii values and it works fine. My main modification was to add "^_" to the end of the default setting to keep vim from seeing underscore as being part of a word.
To delete to the next underscore enter "df_"
To change to the next underscore enter "cf_"
NOTE: don't include the double quotes.