GODOT : can get_string_from_utf8() work with other language? - godot

var keytyped = PoolByteArray([typedevent.unicode]).getstringfrom_utf8()
code above is working fine with english language
but its dont work with Thai language
if i typed [A] its will recognize as [A]
but if i typed [āļĢ] (locate at [I] key) its will recognize as [#] instead of [āļĢ]
is it a way to make it work?
Godot version v3.5.1.stable.official [6fed1ffa3]

Related

What is wrong in this Haskell function?

I decided to dive in functional programming world recently, and a friend told me about Haskell. I started my own researches on the language particularity and soon I got the main concepts. Then, I started working with lists and decided to rewrite some existent functions, just to practice.
I made my version of the reverse function, and called it revert. The function is defined as below:
revert :: [a] -> [a]
revert [] = []
revert a = revert (tail a) ++ [head a]
It works perfectly for me, as you can see in the image:
But then, I decided to make another test, receiving the result of the revert function on the same variable that I passed as a parameter, as you can see below:
It seems to execute the function normally, but when I check the value of x, it looks like it goes into a loop, and I need to interrupt the operation.
If I set the value on another variable, it works perfectly:
let y = revert x
Why does it happen? Is it some concept of functional programming that I am missing? Or some peculiarity with Haskell? I did some googling but was not able to get to an answer
PS: Sorry for the bad english
You're defining
x = revert x
So, substituting on the right, this gives
x = revert (revert x)
And so on. Another example would be
a = a + 1
To find out what a is, we need to evaluate the right hand side of the definition.
a = (a + 1) + 1
a = ((a+1)+1) + 1
And so on.
Bootom line: Haskell's = is very different from = in languages like C#, where it means assignment. In Haskell it means is defined as and this means we can substitute any occurance of an identifier with its definition without changing the meaning of the program. This is called referential transpareny.

Prism over maybe-existent list element

today on "adventures in functional programming with lenses" our hero attempts to define a prism over a list element that may or may not exist.
It's a bit tricky to explain, so to avoid the X, Y problem I'll give the actual use-case in all its glory.
I'm writing a Text editor in Haskell called Rasa, the whole idea is that it's extremely extensible, and that means most functionality is written as extensions. Since it's a core principle, extensions ALSO depend on other extensions, so I needed a way to store their state centrally such that all extensions depending on an extension could access its current 'extension state'. Of course the types of these states is not known to the core of the editor, so at the moment I'm storing a list of Dynamic values. When the extension stores the state it converts to a Dynamic, then it can be extracted later via a prism like so:
data Store = Store
{ _event :: [Event]
, _editor :: E.Editor
, _extState :: [Dynamic]
}
ext :: Typeable a => Traversal' Store a
ext = extState.traverse._Dynamic
So now ext is a polymorphic Traversal that essentially operates over only the Dynamics that 'match' the type in question (if you set to it it'll replace values of the same type, if you 'get' from it, it acts as a traversal over the Dynamics that match the type of the outbound value). If that seems like magic, it basically is...
BTW, I'd love to have exactly 1 copy of a given Extension's state object in the list at any time.
So getting and setting is actually working fine IFF there's already a value of the proper type in the list, my question is how can I make a version of this Traversal such that if a value of the proper type is in the list that it will replace it (and getting works as expected), but that will ADD a value to the list if the traversal is SET to and there's NO matching element in the list. I understand that Traversal's aren't supposed to change the number of elements that they're traversing, so perhaps this needs to be a prism or lens over the list itself?
I understand this is really confusing, so please ask clarifying questions :)
As for things I've taken a look at already, I was looking at prefixed and _Cons as possible ways to do this, but I'm just not quite sure how to wire it up. Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree entirely.
I could perhaps add a default value to the end of the traversal somehow, but I don't want to require Monoid or Default so I can't conjure up elements from nowhere (and I only want to do it when SETTING).
I'm also open to discussions about whether this is actually the proper way to store this state at all, but it's the most elegant of solutions I've found so far (though I know typecasting at run time is sub-optimal). I've looked into the Vault type, but passing keys around didn't really work well when I tried it (and I imagine it has similar type-casting performance issues).
Cheers! Thanks for reading.
I think the list of extensions is not proper solution for you. I would be added something like _extState :: Map TypeRep Ext where data Ext = forall a. Ext a. Then I would be added the lens:
ext :: forall a . Typeable a => Lens' Store (Maybe a)
ext = _extState . at (typeRep (Proxy :: Proxy a)) . mapping coerce
where
coerce = iso (\(Ext x) -> unsafeCoerce x) Ext
This lens does like at. So you can simply get/set your extensions.
But there is one limitation, all extensions must be of different types.

Using Emoji in Haskell

I've recently come across a bot on Twitter named EmojiHaskell, that claims to tweet 'interpretable Haskell code with emoji variable names'. A particular Tweet caught my attention, as it looked like malformed syntax to me, so I decided to take a closer look. So far I've produced the following code:
module Main where
🙏 :: [ðŸģ] -> Maybe ðŸģ
🙏 [] = Nothing
🙏 (ðŸ‘―:as) = Just ðŸ‘―
main = print $ 🙏 "â™Ĩ"
Since I've used Îŧ on occasion in my Haskell code, I expected this code to work, but it appears that GHC doesn't like the emoji at all.
With $ runhaskell Main.hs I get:
Main.hs:4:1: parse error on input ‘🙏’
I've already had a look at the UnicodeSyntax extension,
and tried to only use some or single emoji instead of all of them to see if a certain one provokes the problem.
Now my question is this:
Is there currently a Haskell compiler that would accept the code?
Can I get GHC to work with this code somehow?
That code is not valid haskell. The reason is that 🙏 (like, probably, all Emojis) is a symbol character:
Prelude> import Data.Char
Prelude Data.Char> generalCategory '🙏'
OtherSymbol
But you can still use them like any other symbol, namely as an operator:
Prelude Data.Char> let (🙏) = (+)
Prelude Data.Char> 32 🙏 42
74
Furthermore, as user3237465 pointed out, if you use the prefix syntax for operators, i.e. put it in parentheses, you can even use it like any other symbol:
(🙏) :: [a] -> Maybe a
(🙏) [] = Nothing
(🙏) ((ðŸ‘―):as) = Just (ðŸ‘―)
main = print $ (🙏) "â™Ĩ"
This is almost the example in the original post. Unfortunately, this trick does not work for the type variable. The the documentation is worded a bit unfortunately, but in fact symbols are never type variables and always type constructors

GHC: insert compilation date

I thought there would already be a question about this, but I can't find one.
I want my program to print out the date it was compiled on. What's the easiest way to set that up?
I can think of several possibilities, but none of them are what you'd call "easy". Ideally I'd like to be able to just do ghc --make Foo and have Foo print out the compilation date each time I run it.
Various non-easy possibilities that spring to mind:
Learn Template Haskell. Figure out how to use Data.Time to fetch today's date. Find a way how to transform that into a string. (Now my program requires TH in order to work. I also need to convince it to recompile that module every time, otherwise I get the compilation date for that module [which never changes] rather than the whole program.)
Write a shell script that generates a tiny Haskell module containing the system date. (Now I have to use that shell script rather than compile my program directly. Also, shell scripting on Windows leaves much to be desired!)
Sit down and write some Haskell code which generates a tiny Haskell module containing the date. (More portable than previous idea - but still requires extra build steps or the date printed will be incorrect.)
There might be some way to do this through Cabal - but do I really want to package up this little program just to get a date facility?
Does anybody have any simpler suggestions?
Using Template Haskell for this is relatively simple.
You just need to:
Run IO action within Template Haskell monad:
runIO :: IO a -> Exp a
Then create a string literal with:
stringE :: String -> ExpQ
Put a whole expression within a quasiquote.
$( ... )
This program will print time of its compilation:
{-# LANGUAGE TemplateHaskell #-}
import Language.Haskell.TH
import Data.Time
main = print $(stringE =<< runIO (show `fmap` Data.Time.getCurrentTime))
You may put the relevant fragment into a module that imports all other modules to make sure it is recompiled.
Or take current revision information from your versioning system. See: TemplateHaskell and IO
The preprocessor helpfully defines __DATE__ and __TIME__ macros (just like in C), so this works:
{-# LANGUAGE CPP #-}
main = putStrLn (__DATE__ ++ " " ++ __TIME__)
This is probably simpler than Michal's suggestion of Template Haskell, but doesn't let you choose the format of the date.

Embedding a domain specific language in an OCaml toplevel -- to Camlp4 or not?

I have some code that includes a menhir-based parser for a domain specific language (a logic). For the sake of my sanity while debugging, it would be great to be able to type instances of this language (formulas) directly in the toplevel like so:
# f = << P(x,y) & x!=y >>
Is campl4/5 my only option? If yes, I find the documentation rather intimidating. Is there an example/tutorial that is close-enough to my use case and that I could conceivably adapt? (For instance, syntax extensions that introduce new keywords do not seem relevant). Thanks!
If you're willing to call a function to do the parsing, you can use ocamlmktop to include your parser into the top level. Then you can install printers for your types using #install_printer. The sessions might look like this then:
# let x = parse ()
<< type your expression here >>
# x : type = <<formatted version>>
I have used specialed printers, and they definitely help a lot with complicated types. I've never gotten around to using ocamlmktop. I always just load in my code with #load and #use.
This is a lot easier than mastering camlp4/5 (IMHO). But maybe it's a bit too crude.
Yes, you can use camlp4 and it will work reasonably well (including in the toplevel), but no, it's not well-documented, and you will have to cope with that.
For an example that is close to your use-case, see the Lambda calculus quotation example of the Camlp4 wiki.
For the toplevel, it will work easily. You can dynamically load "camlp4o.cmo" then your syntactic extension in the toplevel, or use findlib which handles that: from the toplevel, #use "topfind";;, then #camlp4o;;, then #require "myfoo.syntax";; where myfoo.syntax is the name of the findlib package you've created to deploy your extension.

Resources