I can't seem to find the answer, how do you create a new file in Ocaml? Do you edit your file in the terminal? Where does the source code appear?
I think you're asking how to write code in OCaml, i.e., how to create an OCaml source file. (This isn't completely clear. You could be asking how to write OCaml code that creates a file.)
The details of creating OCaml source depend on your development environment, not on the language itself. So there is no one answer.
The general answer is that you can use any tool you like that knows how to create a text file. If you like working from the command line (as I do) you can work in a terminal environment and run some kind of vintage text editor from the last millennium (as I do). If you like a GUI environment, you can run some kind of "programmer's editor" from the current millennium, or really any kind of editor that creates basic utf-8 files (or even ASCII files).
Generally the editor will have to be told where to store the files that you edit. You would probably want to make some kind of folder for the project and make sure you store the text files in there.
I hope this helps! If you have any programmers nearby, they can probably get you started a lot faster than asking on StackOverflow.
Related
I'm completely new to SML and I don't understand what am I supposed to do in order to create, edit, compile and run an sml file with PolyML. I'm using Windows and I don't know if I need to download another IDE, or some developement kit like for Java.
I'd like to create files where some functions are defined and then use them by the terminal.
You can edit your SML code in any programming editor you like. Some have better support for syntax highlighting than others. Finding a good editor is a matter of exploration and personal taste and is not suitable for answering here.
Save your SML code to a file that ends in .sml and do one of the following two:
Either, in the terminal enter the following command:
poly --use yourfile.sml
Or, by first typing poly and inside the REPL type the following:
use "yourfile.sml";
I know how to create and code my own setup program but i need to be redirected at some point. This point i'm sure inlight other people too.
I created a setup project. All is done. Except, installation files inside of EXE.
I know 2 different ways of doing this:
Create resource in EXE and embed RAR/ZIP file.
Put compressed archive with files along with EXE. EXE will read contents and data from this protected and compressed ZIP.
But what i want is number 1. I want to embed it. But;
What is the proper way of embedding this? Are other setup creators do the same thing? Embed resource as compressed single zip in EXE? Or do they another trick?
How do you extract files? On the fly by memory? Like read each file one-by-one. Synced. Or first, copy ZIP to temp and extract from it.
Or even embed all files separately to the resources.
I, even think that if i should create simple MSI without dialogs and embed it and run from background but i want to take all control. I want everything belongs to the original setup that i created.
Note:
I want to make my own dialogs, effects, procedures, functions and
steps. Yes, MSI is acceptable but i will stick with its features. Oh,
If im able to extend it, why should i spent more time doing this
instead of making my own? I am so confused... I am talking about very big setup project here. Not just a standard ugly UI with less features. At least, im gonna try :)
Do not give me any sample/code just show me a correct path, please.
Best options here:
Create ZIP compatible EXE that reads itself as ZIP and read the file list and extract.
Create non-zip compatible EXE that has a hidden body somewhere and read that area (seek) and get the list & extract.
The proper way to do it is to use the Windows installer technology, aka MSI. There is a nice, Microsoft blessed toolset called WiX that you can use to greatly simplify the process.
http://wix.codeplex.com/
If you are truly intent on reinventing the wheel, you can look through the source code to WiX on how things are done.
Best options here:
Create ZIP compatible EXE that reads itself as ZIP and read the file list and extract.
Create non-zip compatible EXE that has a hidden body somewhere and read that area (seek) and get the list & extract.
Why write your own? Much easier to use WiX (http://wixtoolset.org/) with optionally a graphical interface like WiXEdit (http://wixedit.sourceforge.net/). Have you thought about additional requirements like uninstall etc...
Good luck!
Would InnoSetup help with your problem? You can personalise the dialogs and extend its functionality quite a lot.
I have preferences file for my application in Qt.
Whenever I launch the application it loads the file & depending the contents creates the widgets accordingly. I have given some customisation option for the user. Now when my application is closed I am checking whether the preferences are changed. If yes then I am opening the preferences file again & then just adding everything again in it. I am not creating a temporary file, I am directly editing the file. Is this method an efficient one? or am I doing it wrong? because I found these threads:
1. What is the best way to edit the middle of an existing flat file?
http://qt-project.org/forums/viewthread/25924/
Should use I binary file? Currently I am using ASCII file.
Thanks.
UPDATE: In the stackoverflow link above the correct answer has
If you're stuck using flat, then you're stuck using the old fashioned
way of updating them
I meant to ask whether the method I am using is old fashioned & is there a better method used nowadays? & what does flat file mean?
Don't try to edit the file. Rewrite the whole thing
Rewrite by using a temporary file. i.e. write the current state of preferences into temp file. And then move/rename the file to your actual preference file after making sure the temp file has been written successfully. This helps in case there is a crash when you rewriting the file. If you rewrite it directly, you will be left with neither the old one nor a good new one. In case you do it through a temp file, then do it this way ensures that in case of a crash, you atleast have a good preferences file(though it contains the old preferences).
Text/Binary doesn't make much difference unless it's a really huge file. Text will help to hand edit it if required.
That's a perfectly fine way of doing it. Since you already seem to have all of the preferences loaded into memory and you have edited them there, you don't need to bother with a temporary file (unless you want to ensure safety if your program fails during writing). Just write all of the preferences back into the original file.
Whether you choose a binary file or text file is up to you. Preferences tend to be text files because they have the added benefit of being human readable with just a text editor, rather than some specialised software for viewing them. A binary file may, however, have slightly better performance due to simpler decoding.
I want to convert all the .odt .doc .xls .pdf files to .txt files.
I want to convert these files to text files using a shell script or a perl script
There's a program for odt files and alikes:
odt2txt - avaliable in repos.
$ unoconv --format=txt document1.odt
Should produce document1.txt.
OpenOffice has a built-in document converter capable of handling a bunch of formats- take a look at unoconv: http://dag.wieers.com/home-made/unoconv/
That being said, I have had some troubles getting that to work in the past- If you're having trouble, take a look at similar programs for AbiWord (another open source word processor).
For word documents, you can try antiword, at least on linux. It's a command line utility that takes a word document as an argument, and spits out the text from that document (as best as it can figure) to Standard Output. Maybe you can specify an ouput file too. I can't remember the details of how it works. I haven't used it in a while. Not sure if it can handle OO documents.
It's certainly possible to do this, though there is something strange and impenetrable about the OO project and its documentation that makes things like this hard to research and follow. However, OO has the capability to convert all of those types, not just the OO native ones, and it can do it via two different forms of automatic control.
These are the two general approaches.
You can start OO and tell it to execute a macro which does this job for you for a given file. You then just have to write the macro and a script to loop over your files. The syntax is something like
$ oowriter -headless filename macro://dir/Standard.Module1.sMySub
The other thing OO has is a network API. This is based on something called UNO.
$ oowriter -accept=accept-string
Notifies the OpenOffice.org software that upon the creation of
"UNO Acceptor Threads", a "UNO Accept String" will be used.
You will need some sort of client library. I think they have one for Python at least. Using this technology a Python program or some other scripting language with an OO client library could drive the program and convert all the files. Since OO reads MSO, it should be able to do all of them.
Open the file in LibreOffice. Click on "File", "Save-as" scroll down to find the text option. Click that and it will be saved as a text file.
FYI, I had an *.ODT file that was 339.2 KB in size. When I save-as text the size of the file shrunk to ONLY 5.0 KB. Another reason for saving your files as text files.
For the Microsoft formats, look into the wvWare tools.
Open .ods file normally in libre office
Highlight text to be converted
Open a terminal
Run vi
Press "i" to get insert mode
Press ctrl-shift-v
Done!
Need some formatting?
Save the file as
Get out of vi
Run:
$cat | column >filename2
This worked in opensuse running KDE
Substitute "kwrite" for "vi", if you want
I was going to create the C++ IDE Vim extendable plugin. It is not a problem to make one which will satisfy my own needs.
This plugin was going to work with workspaces, projects and its dependencies.
This is for unix like system with gcc as c++ compiler.
So my question is what is the most important things you'd need from an IDE? Please take in account that this is Vim, where almost all, almost, is possible.
Several questions:
How often do you manage different workspaces with projects inside them and their relationships between them? What is the most annoying things in this process.
Is is necessary to recreate "project" from the Makefile?
Thanks.
Reason to create this plugin:
With a bunch of plugins and self written ones we can simulate most of things. It is ok when we work on a one big "infinitive" project.
Good when we already have a makefile or jam file. Bad when we have to create our owns, mostly by copy and paste existing.
All ctags and cscope related things have to know about list of a real project files. And we create such ones. This <project#get_list_of_files()> and many similar could be a good project api function to cooperate with an existing and the future plugins.
Cooperation with an existing makefiles can help to find out the list of the real project files and the executable name.
With plugin system inside the plugin there can be different project templates.
Above are some reasons why I will start the job. I'd like to hear your one.
There are multiple problems. Most of them are already solved by independent and generic plugins.
Regarding the definition of what is a project.
Given a set of files in a same directory, each file can be the unique file of a project -- I always have a tests/ directory where I host pet projects, or where I test the behaviour of the compiler. On the opposite, the files from a set of directories can be part of a same and very big project.
In the end, what really defines a project is a (leaf) "makefile" -- And why restrict ourselves to makefiles, what about scons, autotools, ant, (b)jam, aap? And BTW, Sun-Makefiles or GNU-Makefiles ?
Moreover, I don't see any point in having vim know the exact files in the current project. And even so, the well known project.vim plugin already does the job. Personally I use a local_vimrc plugin (I'm maintaining one, and I've seen two others on SF). With this plugin, I just have to drop a _vimrc_local.vim file in a directory, and what is defined in it (:mappings, :functions, variables, :commands, :settings, ...) will apply to each file under the directory -- I work on a big project having a dozen of subcomponents, each component live in its own directory, has its own makefile (not even named Makefile, nor with a name of the directory)
Regarding C++ code understanding
Every time we want to do something complex (refactorings like rename-function, rename-variable, generate-switch-from-current-variable-which-is-an-enum, ...), we need vim to have an understanding of C++. Most of the existing plugins rely on ctags. Unfortunately, ctags comprehension of C++ is quite limited -- I have already written a few advanced things, but I'm often stopped by the poor information provided by ctags. cscope is no better. Eventually, I think we will have to integrate an advanced tool like elsa/pork/ionk/deshydrata/....
NB: That's where, now, I concentrate most of my efforts.
Regarding Doxygen
I don't known how difficult it is to jump to the doxygen definition associated to a current token. The first difficulty is to understand what the cursor is on (I guess omnicppcomplete has already done a lot of work in this direction). The second difficulty will be to understand how doxygen generate the page name for each symbol from the code.
Opening vim at the right line of code from a doxygen page should be simple with a greasemonkey plugin.
Regarding the debugger
There is the pyclewn project for those that run vim under linux, and with gdb as debugger. Unfortunately, it does not support other debuggers like dbx.
Responses to other requirements:
When I run or debug my compiled program, I'd like the option of having a dialog pop up which asks me for the command line parameters. It should remember the last 20 or so parameters I used for the project. I do not want to have to edit the project properties for this.
My BuildToolsWrapper plugin has a g:BTW_run_parameters option (easily overridden with project/local_vimrc solutions). Adding a mapping to ask the arguments to use is really simple. (see :h inputdialog())
work with source control system
There already exist several plugins addressing this issue. This has nothing to do with C++, and it must not be addressed by a C++ suite.
debugger
source code navigation tools (now I am using http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=1638 plugin and ctags)
compile lib/project/one source file from ide
navigation by files in project
work with source control system
easy acces to file changes history
rename file/variable/method functions
easy access to c++ help
easy change project settings (Makefiles, jam, etc)
fast autocomplette for paths/variables/methods/parameters
smart identation for new scopes (also it will be good thing if developer will have posibility to setup identation rules)
highlighting incorrect by code convenstion identation (tabs instead spaces, spaces after ";", spaces near "(" or ")", etc)
reformating selected block by convenstion
Things I'd like in an IDE that the ones I use don't provide:
When I run or debug my compiled program, I'd like the option of having a dialog pop up which asks me for the command line parameters. It should remember the last 20 or so parameters I used for the project. I do not want to have to edit the project properties for this.
A "Tools" menu that is configurable on a per-project basis
Ability to rejig the keyboard mappings for every possible command.
Ability to produce lists of project configurations in text form
Intelligent floating (not docked) windows for debugger etc. that pop up only when I need them, stay on top and then disappear when no longer needed.
Built-in code metrics analysis so I get a list of the most complex functions in the project and can click on them to jump to the code
Built-in support for Doxygen or similar so I can click in a Doxygen document and go directly to code. Sjould also reverse navigate from code to Doxygen.
No doubt someone will now say Eclipse can do this or that, but it's too slow and bloated for me.
Adding to Neil's answer:
integration with gdb as in emacs. I know of clewn, but I don't like that I have to restart vim to restart the debugger. With clewn, vim is integrated into the debugger, but not the other way around.
Not sure if you are developing on Windows, but if you are I suggest you check out Viemu. It is a pretty good VIM extension for Visual Studio. I really like Visual Studio as an IDE (although I still think VC6 is hard to beat), so a Vim extension for VS was perfect for me. Features that I would prefer worked better in a Vim IDE are:
The Macro Recording is a bit error prone, especially with indentation. I find I can easily and often record macros in Vim while I am editing code (eg. taking an enum defn from a header and cranking out a corresponding switch statement), but found that Viemu is a bit flakey in that deptartment.
The VIM code completion picks up words in the current buffer where Viemu hooks into the VS code completion stuff. This means if I have just created a method name and I want to ctrl ] to auto complete, Vim will pick it up, but Viemu won't.
For me, it's just down to the necessities
nice integration with ctags, so you can do jump to definition
intelligent completion, that also give you the function prototype
easy way to switch between code and headers
interactive debugging with breaakpoints, but maybe
maybe folding
extra bonus points for refactoring tools like rename or extract method
I'd say stay away from defining projects - just treat the entire file branch as part of the "project" and let users have a settings file to override that default
99% of the difference in speed I see between IDE and vim users is code lookup and navigation. You need to be able to grep your source tree for a phrase (or intelligently look for the right symbol using ctags), show all the hits, and switch to that file in like two or three keystrokes.
All the other crap like repository navigation or interactive debugging is nice, but there are other ways to solve those problems. I'd say drop the interactive debugging even. Just focus on what makes IDEs good editors - have a "big picture" view of your project, instead of single file.
In fact, are there any plugins for vim that already achieve this?