I've been reading everywhere about the need to organize your R projects and also to use Rmarkdown.
I see an incoherence I can't solve.
Suppose I set for the following standard organization:
Project
data
raw-data
code
docs
out
reports
and also home of setwd().
Now I want to use Rmarkdown with my main project file called My_project.Rmd
I create it at the root project level, then I get at every knit rendition 2 directories created My_project_cache and My_project_files on to of every .hml file rendered that conflicts with the above structure.
This is very impractical.
I tried setting the options of output to avoid this, per this tip, but it fails on the cache directory, and I did not succeeded in setting Knit options to bypass it. And no-one seems to be bothered by this question making the solution look like a dead-end.
The other solution is to put My_project.Rmd directly in reports/ but it feels a little awkward and on top of that it breaks the above project structure by imposing ../ paths everywhere.
The third solution is to work with Rmd format, only at the end of a project, but this seems a little defeating the purpose of documenting everything neatly in the first place.
There may be a 4th solution using R Notebook feature, but it works until you decide to try to finalize your "final" document , which of course is never really final.
What am I missing here ?
For reference, I'm using RStudio on a Mac.
I have a solution called book_example with one project inside called first_project. I want to make several more example projects called second_project, third_project etc. within this solution.
So, when I open book_example in the solution explorer it would show all of my projects. I want them to share source code so all file paths etc. should be the same.
When I right click the solution Add -> New Project even if I use a template that is exactly the same as my existing first_project all of the paths do not work. Basic things like my source.cpp say "This file does not exist or has been moved".
Edit: To be more clear, when I try a solution like the one proposed by madocter below, I get errors with the project. I.e.:
What is the correct way to create several projects within one solution that share code?
On my workplace we are not allowed to used Sharepoint Designer, but I need to make a list with customized columns but still maintaining the original style and functionality.
My idea was to find a way to export the list XSL, edit it and use the option to use a custom XSL on the web part.
The thing is, I coudln't find a way to get the XSL, I only found ways to export the XML. I need a way to change how the list is displayed in a way someone else other than me can keep the list updated without needing a lot of programming knowledge
That's a tough one. The technical answer is that the .xsl files start at /_layouts/xsl/main.xsl and /_layouts/xsl/local.xsl, which call more files. However, customization of a list or library will be embedded within the aspx page you're using to view it, and the xsl is "by exception" for anything different than the default templates. SPD creates a whole lot of that exception code automatically. You can try to reverse engineer the main, local, and other xsl files, but that's a herculean task. If you have a specific list and a specific goal, you could post your WebPartPages:XsltListViewWebPart code here or in a new question and someone with SPD could make the changes for you.
One alternative, which you might prefer since it'll leave you in control, is to set up your page to be as close to your desired design as you can, then save the aspx file locally. Using a standalone (maybe even personal) computer, install SPD and (if it comes to it) a copy of SharePoint Foundation. Add your aspx file to that, use SPD to make the changes, and copy the file back. Be sure to keep an eye on the list and view guids, since those'll change between the two, but otherwise they should be the same.
in order to make new C++ classes conform to some rather picky coding conventions (upfront: I am not in the position to discuss these...), I was thinking about a way of generating stubs for new C++ classes. Currently, everyone is doing copy-paste, regularly missing some detail. The IDE in use is MS Visual Studio 2005, but I think there has not been much of a change in 2008 and 2010 regarding these topics.
My first idea was to implement a command line script to do this, which would be fairly straight forward to do. Alternatively, I thought about using a default VS extension mechanism for better IDE integration. So, this would be hooking in some custom stuff when selecting Add->New Item... on a filter (Solution Explorer).
After some investigation, I found out there is an easy-to-use templating mechanism, which unfortunately does not work for C++ (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/6db0hwky%28v=vs.80%29.aspx). For C++, it seems like you have to implement a custom wizard instead, incorporating html for the layout and javascript for the logic.
Regarding the custom wizard approach, I've come to the conclusion that this would require some effort (at least for me) to get this done. MSDN is not very detailed on this topic. I've found some walkthroughs in the web, which are dealing with custom wizards for projects only (Add->New Project... instead of Add->New Item...).
So, here's the qn: Anyone having done this or something similar? Is it (better IDE integration) worth the effort (coping with the details of custom wizard implementation), or would you suggest the go for the command line tool instead? More than two days of work would not pay off in the current project, I guess.
If you think custom wizards are great, maybe you can give some hints to get started. Also, maybe there are alternatives I did not come up with. VS Add-Ins seemed to be over the top for this, and adapting e.g. VC\vcprojectitems\newc++file.cpp will not do the job.
Thanks in advance and best regards...
Jerb
I have done something similar using a custom wizard.
For my purposes I just wanted to inject some simple macros into each class to insert it into a static factory object.
I didn't need to modify the actual wizard, just copied the default generic class wizard and modified the code generation javascript.
The documentation is rubbish on the topic, but here is a good place to start for the javascript (that is where you are going to get the most power):
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/t41260xs(v=VS.71).aspx
The default class wizard javascript is located here:
C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio
10.0\VC\VCWizards\CodeWiz\Generic\Class\Scripts\1033\default.js
Duping the Project
Duplicating this is trickier than I thought, you need to copy and paste the
Microsoft Visual Studio 10.0\VC\VCWizards\CodeWiz\Generic\
folder, then head to:
C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 10.0\VC\VCAddClass\Generic
Dupe this folder and modify the Generic.vsdir inside it to point to a dupe of ..\Simple.vsz (a file in the VCAddClass folder).
The Simple.vsz file points back to the location of the "Generic" folder in VCWizards you duped at the start, so point your new simple.vsz at that.
Code Generation
As for the actual code generation, its not all that difficult to pick up. To get things started faster, here is the General way the default.js works:
Once the wizard is finished, the code gen method kicks off from:
function OnFinish(selProj, selObj)
selProj is (as far as I can tell) an instance of EnvDTE.Project
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/envdte.project.aspx
Getting information from the wizard seems to be based around:
wizard.FindSymbol("CLASS_NAME")
The real magic starts to happen on the selProj.CodeModel object
oCM.AddClass(strClassName, strHeader, vsCMAddPositionEnd, "", "", vsCMAccessDefault);
It seems the convention for these methods to add anything to a file simply modifies the file as a single action, as it requires the file path as its paramter.
This returns a CodeClass instance and can be added to by its methods like:
AddAttribute
AddFunction
...
This is quite restricting if you are looking for very strict code formatting (or in my case inserting macros that don't fit normal code syntax.
The simple way around this is to just build a string on your own for the parts that you need full control over using the EditPoint interface.
An EditPoint is a location inside a code file to which you can call methods like:
EditPoint.Insert(string)
Editpoint.InsertFromFile(path)
To get an EditPoint in a location where you would want to insert code, simply use the location of one of the existing items in the code gen file (like class or constructor) and get a TextPoint using .StartPointOf or .EndPointOf and manipulating the parameters.
Once you have a TextPoint you can create an EditPoint like so:
newclass.EndPointOf(vsCMPartBody).CreateEditPoint().Insert("\nprivate:\n REGISTER_TYPE_MEMBER("+strClassName+");\n");
To get a TextPoint inside the .cpp file instead:
oConstructor.StartPointOf(vsCMPartWhole,vsCMWhereDefinition).CreateEditPoint().Insert("REGISTER_TYPE_BODY_ID("+strClassName+",REPLACE_ID);\n\n\n");
This gives you the power to do anything you want via JScript string manipulation as long as you can find the input data you need via the wizard (which I have not yet delved into)
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?