I'm not familiar with rust and trynna using swc to replace the babel
but I found #swc/core doesn't offer the api to generate code AST, so I want to write one using rust, is it possible to generate jsx ast?
Here is a good place to start: https://github.com/swc-project/swc/blob/main/crates/swc_ecma_parser/examples/typescript.rs
but link can get invalid so I also pasted the code:
use swc_common::{
self,
errors::{ColorConfig, Handler},
sync::Lrc,
FileName, SourceMap,
};
use swc_ecma_parser::{lexer::Lexer, Capturing, Parser, StringInput, Syntax};
fn main() {
let cm: Lrc<SourceMap> = Default::default();
let handler = Handler::with_tty_emitter(ColorConfig::Auto, true, false, Some(cm.clone()));
// Real usage
// let fm = cm
// .load_file(Path::new("test.js"))
// .expect("failed to load test.js");
let fm = cm.new_source_file(
FileName::Custom("test.js".into()),
"interface Foo {}".into(),
);
let lexer = Lexer::new(
Syntax::Typescript(Default::default()),
Default::default(),
StringInput::from(&*fm),
None,
);
let capturing = Capturing::new(lexer);
let mut parser = Parser::new_from(capturing);
for e in parser.take_errors() {
e.into_diagnostic(&handler).emit();
}
let _module = parser
.parse_typescript_module()
.map_err(|e| e.into_diagnostic(&handler).emit())
.expect("Failed to parse module.");
println!("Tokens: {:?}", parser.input().take());
}
I never really worked or cared about this. All it took was 5min of browsing the repository, all the resources are there but if you are new to rust, I recommend the rust book first.
Related
I'm evaluating/learning flatbuffers and I've written a schema and some basic code. The schema contains two root tables but when I try to convert a wrong root it doesn't fail. Is this expected behavior?
schema.fbs:
table Weapon {
name:string;
damage:short;
two_handed:bool;
}
root_type Weapon;
table Shield {
name:string;
damage:short;
}
root_type Shield;
main.rs:
use flatbuffers;
// import the generated code
#[allow(dead_code, unused_imports)]
#[path = "./schema_generated.rs"]
mod schema;
fn main() {
let mut sword_builder = flatbuffers::FlatBufferBuilder::new();
let sword_name = sword_builder.create_string("Sword");
let sword = schema::Weapon::create(
&mut sword_builder,
&schema::WeaponArgs {
name: Some(sword_name),
damage: 10,
two_handed: false,
},
);
sword_builder.finish(sword, None);
let sword_buffer = sword_builder.finished_data();
let mut shield_builder = flatbuffers::FlatBufferBuilder::new();
let shield_name = shield_builder.create_string("Shield");
let shield = schema::Weapon::create(
&mut shield_builder,
&schema::WeaponArgs {
name: Some(shield_name),
damage: 2,
two_handed: true,
},
);
shield_builder.finish(shield, None);
let shield_buffer = shield_builder.finished_data();
// Lets decode our buffers
let sword_decoded = flatbuffers::root::<schema::Weapon>(&sword_buffer).unwrap();
println!("{:#?}", sword_decoded);
let shield_decoded = flatbuffers::root::<schema::Shield>(&shield_buffer).unwrap();
println!("{:#?}", shield_decoded);
// This should fail:
let sword_decoded_failure = flatbuffers::root::<schema::Weapon>(&shield_buffer).unwrap();
println!("{:#?}", sword_decoded_failure);
}
output:
Weapon {
name: Some(
"Sword",
),
damage: 10,
two_handed: false,
}
Shield {
name: Some(
"Shield",
),
damage: 2,
}
Weapon {
name: Some(
"Shield",
),
damage: 2,
two_handed: true,
}
github link: https://github.com/ic3man5/fb_test
Documentation for root:
Gets the root of the Flatbuffer, verifying it first with default options. Note that verification is an experimental feature and may not be maximally performant or catch every error (though that is the goal). See the _unchecked variants for previous behavior.
I would expect it to be able to catch a basic error like this? If so I can see two work arounds, one to prepend a header in front of the bytes to identify the table or using a flatbuffer union (I don't want to do this).
Flatbuffers only allows one root type per schema and one instance of it per buffer. So your schema needs to change to reflect this.
As for there being no error, a verifier takes a binary buffer of bytes and checks that it can be safely accessed according to the current schema. There is no type information in the binary bytes, so if the bytes happen to be safely accessible by another schema, it may succeed. To force it to not succeed, you could add a file_identifier to your schema, which if the Rust verifier checks it, would cause it to fail for the wrong schema.
I am familiar with Gstreamer but new to Rust,
TLDR; I want to be able to initialize PadProbeId to a default value before using it.
The details:
I have a Bin (containing audio + video encoders and hlssink).
I have been able to add this bin to the pipeline and it works fine.
The issue I have is the audio for the stream is optional and I want to do add_probe() only when audio is available. Below is a simplified version fo what I tried to implement
let mut audio_probe_id: PadProbeId;
let mut tee_audio_pad: Pad;
if media_info.audio_available {
// get encoded audio from the tee
tee_audio_pad = audio_tee.request_pad_simple("src_%u").unwrap();
audio_probe_id = tee_audio_pad.add_probe(gst::PadProbeType::BLOCK_DOWNSTREAM, |_pad, _info| {
gst::PadProbeReturn::Ok
}).unwrap();
// link the audio_tee.src to enc_bin ghost pad
let audio_sink_pad = enc_bin.static_pad("audio").unwrap();
tee_audio_pad.link(&audio_sink_pad).unwrap();
}
enc_bin.call_async(move |bin| {
bin.sync_state_with_parent().unwrap();
if media_info.audio_available {
tee_audio_pad.remove_probe(audio_probe_id);
}
}
However because of Rust compilers restriction to using uninitialized variables, it does not let me use audio_probe_id without initializing.
I tried to initialize it like this; let mut audio_probe_id: PadProbeId = PadProbeId(NonZeroU64(u64::MAX));. However compiler complains that it is a private field.
error[E0423]: cannot initialize a tuple struct which contains private fields
Thanks a lot for your help!
The rust way to have empty variables like this is to use Option, but in your case it would simpler to have a single conditional:
if media_info.audio_available {
// get encoded audio from the tee
let tee_audio_pad = audio_tee.request_pad_simple("src_%u").unwrap();
let audio_probe_id = tee_audio_pad.add_probe(gst::PadProbeType::BLOCK_DOWNSTREAM, |_pad, _info| {
gst::PadProbeReturn::Ok
}).unwrap();
// link the audio_tee.src to enc_bin ghost pad
let audio_sink_pad = enc_bin.static_pad("audio").unwrap();
tee_audio_pad.link(&audio_sink_pad).unwrap();
enc_bin.call_async(move |bin| {
bin.sync_state_with_parent().unwrap();
tee_audio_pad.remove_probe(audio_probe_id);
}
} else {
enc_bin.call_async(move |bin| {
bin.sync_state_with_parent().unwrap();
});
}
I am parsing this
[xxxxx]
drive0={}
drive1={path="xxxx"}
...
sometimes there is a path, sometimes not.
I have working code but I am still trying to learn the rust idiomatic way of doing things. Code:
for i in 0..8 {
let drive_name = format!("drive{}", i);
if dmap.contains_key(&drive_name) {
if let Some(d) = config[drive_name].as_table() {
this.units.push(Rkunit::new(true));
if d.contains_key("path") {
if let Some(path) = d["path"].as_str() {
let file = OpenOptions::new()
.read(true)
.write(true)
.create(true)
.open(path)
.unwrap();
this.units[i].file.replace(file);
}
}
} else {
this.units.push(Rkunit::new(false));
}
}
}
I expected that
if let Some(path) = d["path"].as_str()
(ie without if d.contains() line)
would deal with both cases - ie no "path" and "path" isnt string, but it does not. Same with the contains_key(drive_name) too.
I tried various guessed at syntaxes to see if I could avoid another nested if and could find one.
So is there a better way or is this as good as it gets. Any other comments on parsing toml welcome.
There are a few approaches here that might be valid. Since your code is quite complex and uses non-std API's, it's hard to see if my change would be useful:
Use your general code structure, but combined .contains and applying a function the the contained value into the pattern .get(...).map(...). x.get(y) returns an Option value, which allows you access to the whole Option API, unlike x[y] which would panic if the key doesn't exist.
if let Some(d) = config.get(&drive_name).map(|c| c.as_table()) {
this.units.push(Rkunit::new(true);
if let Some(path) = d.get("path").and_then(String::as_str) {
}
} else {
this.units.push(Rkunit::new(false));
}
You can use a match statement with some pre-work. I personally prefer this, since it makes the match arms very explicit, but i think it's less idiomatic:
let drive = config.get(&driver_name); // return an option
let path = drive.map(|d|.get("path")); // returns an option
match (drive, path) {
(Some(d), Some(p)) => {
this.units.push(Rkunit::new(true));
let file = OpenOptions::new()
.read(true)
.write(true)
.create(true)
.open(path)
.unwrap();
this.units[i].file.replace(p);
}
(Some(d), None) => {
this.units.push(Rkunit::new(true);
}
_ => {
this.units.push(Rkunit::new(false);
}
}
I think 1. is more idiomatic, but I've certainly seen both and it's probably more a matter of style. Composing Option certainly is idiomatic over contains & access.
Somebody may consider chaining of options more idiomatic, yet it's harder to follow.
config.get(&driver_name)
.or_else(|| { // no drive, passing None all the way down
this.units.push(Rkunit::new(false));
None
})
.and_then(|drive| { // having a drive, trying to get a path
this.units.push(Rkunit::new(true));
drive.as_table().get("path")
})
.map(|path| { // only having a path, we're doing the thing
let file = OpenOptions::new()
.read(true)
.write(true)
.create(true)
.open(path.as_str()) // as_str is there
.unwrap();
this.units[i].file.replace(file);
});
// also "unused Option" warning, because map returns an Option<()>
based on slight massage of somnium's answer I ended with this. It feels crisper and I got to learn some more idiomatic rust
for i in 0..8 {
let drive_name = format!("drive{}", i);
if let Some(drive) = dmap.get(&drive_name).and_then(|x| x.as_table()) {
this.units.push(Rkunit::new(true));
if let Some(path) = drive.get("path").and_then(|x| x.as_str()) {
let file = OpenOptions::new()
.read(true)
.write(true)
.create(true)
.open(path)
.unwrap();
this.units[i].file.replace(file);
}
} else {
this.units.push(Rkunit::new(false));
}
}
I am aware that any config errors are silently ignored. But thats what I was after. Probaly shouldnt explode if an illegal path is given though -> Later
I'm learning rust and trying to make a find like utility (yes another one), im using clap and trying to support command line and config file for the program's parameters(this has nothing to do with the clap yml file).
Im trying to parse the commands and if no commands were passed to the app, i will try to load them from a config file.
Now I don't know how to do this in an idiomatic way.
fn main() {
let matches = App::new("findx")
.version(crate_version!())
.author(crate_authors!())
.about("find + directory operations utility")
.arg(
Arg::with_name("paths")
...
)
.arg(
Arg::with_name("patterns")
...
)
.arg(
Arg::with_name("operation")
...
)
.get_matches();
let paths;
let patterns;
let operation;
if matches.is_present("patterns") && matches.is_present("operation") {
patterns = matches.values_of("patterns").unwrap().collect();
paths = matches.values_of("paths").unwrap_or(clap::Values<&str>{"./"}).collect(); // this doesn't work
operation = match matches.value_of("operation").unwrap() { // I dont like this
"Append" => Operation::Append,
"Prepend" => Operation::Prepend,
"Rename" => Operation::Rename,
_ => {
print!("Operation unsupported");
process::exit(1);
}
};
}else if Path::new("findx.yml").is_file(){
//TODO: try load from config file
}else{
eprintln!("Command line parameters or findx.yml file must be provided");
process::exit(1);
}
if let Err(e) = findx::run(Config {
paths: paths,
patterns: patterns,
operation: operation,
}) {
eprintln!("Application error: {}", e);
process::exit(1);
}
}
There is an idiomatic way to extract Option and Result types values to the same scope, i mean all examples that i have read, uses match or if let Some(x) to consume the x value inside the scope of the pattern matching, but I need to assign the value to a variable.
Can someone help me with this, or point me to the right direction?
Best Regards
Personally I see nothing wrong with using the match statements and folding it or placing it in another function. But if you want to remove it there are many options.
There is the ability to use the .default_value_if() method which is impl for clap::Arg and have a different default value depending on which match arm is matched.
From the clap documentation
//sets value of arg "other" to "default" if value of "--opt" is "special"
let m = App::new("prog")
.arg(Arg::with_name("opt")
.takes_value(true)
.long("opt"))
.arg(Arg::with_name("other")
.long("other")
.default_value_if("opt", Some("special"), "default"))
.get_matches_from(vec![
"prog", "--opt", "special"
]);
assert_eq!(m.value_of("other"), Some("default"));
In addition you can add a validator to your operation OR convert your valid operation values into flags.
Here's an example converting your match arm values into individual flags (smaller example for clarity).
extern crate clap;
use clap::{Arg,App};
fn command_line_interface<'a>() -> clap::ArgMatches<'a> {
//Sets the command line interface of the program.
App::new("something")
.version("0.1")
.arg(Arg::with_name("rename")
.help("renames something")
.short("r")
.long("rename"))
.arg(Arg::with_name("prepend")
.help("prepends something")
.short("p")
.long("prepend"))
.arg(Arg::with_name("append")
.help("appends something")
.short("a")
.long("append"))
.get_matches()
}
#[derive(Debug)]
enum Operation {
Rename,
Append,
Prepend,
}
fn main() {
let matches = command_line_interface();
let operation = if matches.is_present("rename") {
Operation::Rename
} else if matches.is_present("prepend"){
Operation::Prepend
} else {
//DEFAULT
Operation::Append
};
println!("Value of operation is {:?}",operation);
}
I hope this helps!
EDIT:
You can also use Subcommands with your specific operations. It all depends on what you want to interface to be like.
let app_m = App::new("git")
.subcommand(SubCommand::with_name("clone"))
.subcommand(SubCommand::with_name("push"))
.subcommand(SubCommand::with_name("commit"))
.get_matches();
match app_m.subcommand() {
("clone", Some(sub_m)) => {}, // clone was used
("push", Some(sub_m)) => {}, // push was used
("commit", Some(sub_m)) => {}, // commit was used
_ => {}, // Either no subcommand or one not tested for...
}
I would like to parse a web page, insert anchors at certain positions and render the modified DOM out again in order to generate docsets for Dash. Is this possible?
From the examples included in html5ever, I can see how to read an HTML file and do a poor man's HTML output, but I don't understand how I can modify the RcDom object I retrieved.
I would like to see a snippet inserting an anchor element (<a name="foo"></a>) to an RcDom.
Note: this is a question regarding Rust and html5ever specifically ... I know how to do it in other languages or simpler HTML parsers.
Here is some code that parses a document, adds an achor to the link and prints the new document:
extern crate html5ever;
use html5ever::{ParseOpts, parse_document};
use html5ever::tree_builder::TreeBuilderOpts;
use html5ever::rcdom::RcDom;
use html5ever::rcdom::NodeEnum::Element;
use html5ever::serialize::{SerializeOpts, serialize};
use html5ever::tendril::TendrilSink;
fn main() {
let opts = ParseOpts {
tree_builder: TreeBuilderOpts {
drop_doctype: true,
..Default::default()
},
..Default::default()
};
let data = "<!DOCTYPE html><html><body></body></html>".to_string();
let dom = parse_document(RcDom::default(), opts)
.from_utf8()
.read_from(&mut data.as_bytes())
.unwrap();
let document = dom.document.borrow();
let html = document.children[0].borrow();
let body = html.children[1].borrow(); // Implicit head element at children[0].
{
let mut a = body.children[0].borrow_mut();
if let Element(_, _, ref mut attributes) = a.node {
attributes[0].value.push_tendril(&From::from("#anchor"));
}
}
let mut bytes = vec![];
serialize(&mut bytes, &dom.document, SerializeOpts::default()).unwrap();
let result = String::from_utf8(bytes).unwrap();
println!("{}", result);
}
This prints the following:
<html><head></head><body></body></html>
As you can see, we can navigate through the child nodes via the children attribute.
And we can change an attribute present in the vector of attributes of an Element.