Can't figure out how to get function name as string in macro.
The code below should generate rlisten("multiply", multiply) but it won't compile, playground.
import macros
proc rlisten*[A, B, R](fn: string, op: proc(a: A, b: B): R): void =
echo fn
macro remotefn(fn): void =
quote do:
rlisten($`fn`, `fn`) # It should generte `rlisten("multiply", multiply)`
proc multiply(a, b: int): int = discard
remotefn multiply
First you need to accept typed or untyped parameters to a macro. In this particular case you need to use typed argument in order to be able to access the function symbol (symbols are identifiers replaced by type resolution pass of the compiler).
import macros
proc rlisten*[A, B, R](fn: string, op: proc(a: A, b: B): R): void =
echo fn
macro remotefn(fn: typed): void =
echo fn.treeRepr()
# ^ Show tree representation of the argument. In this particular case it is just a
# single function symbol.
let name = fn.strVal()
echo "Function name is ", name
proc multiply(a, b: int): int = discard
remotefn multiply
Outputs
Sym "multiply"
Function name is multiply
Related
I want convert string to Map in grails. I already have a function of string to map conversion. Heres the code,
static def StringToMap(String reportValues){
Map result=[:]
result=reportValues.replace('[','').replace(']','').replace(' ','').split(',').inject([:]){map,token ->
List tokenizeStr=token.split(':');
tokenizeStr.size()>1?tokenizeStr?.with {map[it[0]?.toString()?.trim()]=it[1]?.toString()?.trim()}:tokenizeStr?.with {map[it[0]?.toString()?.trim()]=''}
map
}
return result
}
But, I have String with comma in the values, so the above function doesn't work for me. Heres my String
[program_type:, subsidiary_code:, groupName:, termination_date:, effective_date:, subsidiary_name:ABC, INC]
my function returns ABC only. not ABC, INC. I googled about it but couldnt find any concrete help.
Generally speaking, if I have to convert a Stringified Map to a Map object I try to make use of Eval.me. Your example String though isn't quite right to do so, if you had the following it would "just work":
// Note I have added '' around the values.
String a = "[program_type:'', subsidiary_code:'', groupName:'', termination_date:'', effective_date:'', subsidiary_name:'ABC']"
Map b = Eval.me(a)
// returns b = [program_type:, subsidiary_code:, groupName:, termination_date:, effective_date:, subsidiary_name:ABC]
If you have control of the String then if you can create it following this kind of pattern, it would be the easiest solution I suspect.
In case it is not possible to change the input parameter, this might be a not so clean and not so short option. It relies on the colon instead of comma values.
String reportValues = "[program_type:, subsidiary_code:, groupName:, termination_date:, effective_date:, subsidiary_name:ABC, INC]"
reportValues = reportValues[1..-2]
def m = reportValues.split(":")
def map = [:]
def length = m.size()
m.eachWithIndex { v, i ->
if(i != 0) {
List l = m[i].split(",")
if (i == length-1) {
map.put(m[i-1].split(",")[-1], l.join(","))
} else {
map.put(m[i-1].split(",")[-1], l[0..-2].join(","))
}
}
}
map.each {key, value -> println "key: " + key + " value: " + value}
BTW: Only use eval on trusted input, AFAIK it executes everything.
You could try messing around with this bit of code:
String tempString = "[program_type:11, 'aa':'bb', subsidiary_code:, groupName:, termination_date:, effective_date:, subsidiary_name:ABC, INC]"
List StringasList = tempString.tokenize('[],')
def finalMap=[:]
StringasList?.each { e->
def f = e?.split(':')
finalMap."${f[0]}"= f.size()>1 ? f[1] : null
}
println """-- tempString: ${tempString.getClass()} StringasList: ${StringasList.getClass()}
finalMap: ${finalMap.getClass()} \n Results\n finalMap ${finalMap}
"""
Above produces:
-- tempString: class java.lang.String StringasList: class java.util.ArrayList
finalMap: class java.util.LinkedHashMap
Results
finalMap [program_type:11, 'aa':'bb', subsidiary_code:null, groupName:null, termination_date:null, effective_date:null, subsidiary_name:ABC, INC:null]
It tokenizes the String then converts ArrayList by iterating through the list and passing each one again split against : into a map. It also has to check to ensure the size is greater than 1 otherwise it will break on f[1]
I'm wondering how to use a "concept" in nim (0.13). I have the following code:
type
T = concept t
t.a is string
T0 = ref object
a: string
T1 = ref object
a: string
q: string
proc echoT(t: T) : void =
echo "hello " & t.a
echoT(T0(a: "T0"))
echoT(T1(a: "T1", q: "q"))
However, the compiler complains on the first call to echoT:
t.nim(21, 6) Error: type mismatch: got (T0)
Shouldn't this work the same as replacing the echoT declaration with:
proc echoT[T](t: T): void = echo "hello " & t.a
(which does compile and run), except that, in the concept version, the constraint
t.a is string is enforced?
How do I get the compiler to recognize the use of a concept?
Your example compiles and works fine for me (Nim 0.13.0). Is it possible you made a typo in your source file?
Why does map have different behavior on Go?
All types in Go are copied by value: string, intxx, uintxx, floatxx, struct, [...]array, []slice except for map[key]value
package main
import "fmt"
type test1 map[string]int
func (t test1) DoSomething() { // doesn't need to use pointer
t["yay"] = 1
}
type test2 []int
func (t* test2) DoSomething() { // must use pointer so changes would effect
*t = append(*t,1)
}
type test3 struct{
a string
b int
}
func (t* test3) DoSomething() { // must use pointer so changes would effect
t.a = "aaa"
t.b = 123
}
func main() {
t1 := test1{}
u1 := t1
u1.DoSomething()
fmt.Println("u1",u1)
fmt.Println("t1",t1)
t2 := test2{}
u2 := t2
u2.DoSomething()
fmt.Println("u2",u2)
fmt.Println("t2",t2)
t3 := test3{}
u3 := t3
u3.DoSomething()
fmt.Println("u3",u3)
fmt.Println("t3",t3)
}
And passing variable as function's parameter/argument is equal to assignment with :=
package main
import "fmt"
type test1 map[string]int
func DoSomething1(t test1) { // doesn't need to use pointer
t["yay"] = 1
}
type test2 []int
func DoSomething2(t *test2) { // must use pointer so changes would effect
*t = append(*t,1)
}
type test3 struct{
a string
b int
}
func DoSomething3(t *test3) { // must use pointer so changes would effect
t.a = "aaa"
t.b = 123
}
func main() {
t1 := test1{}
DoSomething1(t1)
fmt.Println("t1",t1)
t2 := test2{}
DoSomething2(&t2)
fmt.Println("t2",t2)
t3 := test3{}
DoSomething3(&t3)
fmt.Println("t3",t3)
}
Map values are pointers. Some other types (slice, string, channel, function) are, similarly, implemented with pointers. Interestingly, the linked FAQ entry says,
Early on, maps and channels were syntactically pointers and it was impossible to declare or use a non-pointer instance. ... Eventually we decided that the strict separation of pointers and values made the language harder to use.
"Go passes by value" means variables passed as regular function args won't be modified by the called function. That doesn't change that some built-in types can contain pointers (just like your own structs can).
Python is similar: f(x) won't change an integer x passed to it, but it can append to a list x because Python lists are implemented with a pointer internally. C++, by contrast, has actual pass-by-reference available: f(x) can change the caller's int x if f is declared to have a reference parameter (void f(int& x)).
(I also wrote some general info on pointers vs. values in Go in an answer to another question, if that helps.)
I am attempting to create a Scala method that will take one parent group of parentheses, represented as a String, and then map each subgroup of parentheses to a different letter. It should then put these in a map which it returns, so basically I call the following method like this:
val s = "((2((x+3)+6)))"
val map = mapParentheses(s)
Where s could contain any number of sets of parentheses, and the Map returned should contain:
"(x+3)" -> 'a'
"(a+6)" -> 'b'
"(2b)" -> 'c'
"(c)" -> 'd'
So that elsewhere in my program I can recall 'd' and get "(c)" which will become "((2b))" then ((2(a+6))) and finally ((2((x+3)+6))). The string sent to the method mapParentheses will never have unmatched parentheses, or extra chars outside of the main parent parentheses, so the following items will never be sent:
"(fsf)a" because the a is outside the parent parentheses
"(a(aa))(a)" because the (a) is outside the parent parentheses
"((a)" because the parentheses are unmatched
")a(" because the parentheses are unmatched
So I was wondering if anyone knew of an easy (or not easy) way of creating this mapParentheses method.
You can do this pretty easily with Scala's parser combinators. First for the import and some simple data structures:
import scala.collection.mutable.Queue
import scala.util.parsing.combinator._
sealed trait Block {
def text: String
}
case class Stuff(text: String) extends Block
case class Paren(m: List[(String, Char)]) extends Block {
val text = m.head._2.toString
def toMap = m.map { case (k, v) => "(" + k + ")" -> v }.toMap
}
I.e., a block represents a substring of the input that is either some non-parenthetical stuff or a parenthetical.
Now for the parser itself:
class ParenParser(fresh: Queue[Char]) extends RegexParsers {
val stuff: Parser[Stuff] = "[^\\(\\)]+".r ^^ (Stuff(_))
def paren: Parser[Paren] = ("(" ~> insides <~ ")") ^^ {
case (s, m) => Paren((s -> fresh.dequeue) :: m)
}
def insides: Parser[(String, List[(String, Char)])] =
rep1(paren | stuff) ^^ { blocks =>
val s = blocks.flatMap(_.text)(collection.breakOut)
val m = blocks.collect {
case Paren(n) => n
}.foldLeft(List.empty[(String, Char)])(_ ++ _)
(s, m)
}
def parse(input: String) = this.parseAll(paren, input).get.toMap
}
Using get in the last line is very much not ideal, but is justified by your assertion that we can expect well-formed input.
Now we can create a new parser and pass in a mutable queue with some fresh variables:
val parser = new ParenParser(Queue('a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e', 'f'))
And now try out your test string:
scala> println(parser parse "((2((x+3)+6)))")
Map((c) -> d, (2b) -> c, (a+6) -> b, (x+3) -> a)
As desired. A more interesting exercise (left to the reader) would be to thread some state through the parser to avoid the mutable queue.
Classic recursive parsing problem. It can be handy to hold the different bits. We'll add a few utility methods to help us out later.
trait Part {
def text: String
override def toString = text
}
class Text(val text: String) extends Part {}
class Parens(val contents: Seq[Part]) extends Part {
val text = "(" + contents.mkString + ")"
def mapText(m: Map[Parens, Char]) = {
val inside = contents.collect{
case p: Parens => m(p).toString
case x => x.toString
}
"(" + inside.mkString + ")"
}
override def equals(a: Any) = a match {
case p: Parens => text == p.text
case _ => false
}
override def hashCode = text.hashCode
}
Now you need to parse into these things:
def str2parens(s: String): (Parens, String) = {
def fail = throw new Exception("Wait, you told me the input would be perfect.")
if (s(0) != '(') fail
def parts(s: String, found: Seq[Part] = Vector.empty): (Seq[Part], String) = {
if (s(0)==')') (found,s)
else if (s(0)=='(') {
val (p,s2) = str2parens(s)
parts(s2, found :+ p)
}
else {
val (tx,s2) = s.span(c => c != '(' && c != ')')
parts(s2, found :+ new Text(tx))
}
}
val (inside, more) = parts(s.tail)
if (more(0)!=')') fail
(new Parens(inside), more.tail)
}
Now we've got the whole thing parsed. So let's find all the bits.
def findParens(p: Parens): Set[Parens] = {
val inside = p.contents.collect{ case q: Parens => findParens(q) }
inside.foldLeft(Set(p)){_ | _}
}
Now we can build the map you want.
def mapParentheses(s: String) = {
val (p,_) = str2parens(s)
val pmap = findParens(p).toSeq.sortBy(_.text.length).zipWithIndex.toMap
val p2c = pmap.mapValues(i => ('a'+i).toChar)
p2c.map{ case(p,c) => (p.mapText(p2c), c) }.toMap
}
Evidence that it works:
scala> val s = "((2((x+3)+6)))"
s: java.lang.String = ((2((x+3)+6)))
scala> val map = mapParentheses(s)
map: scala.collection.immutable.Map[java.lang.String,Char] =
Map((x+3) -> a, (a+6) -> b, (2b) -> c, (c) -> d)
I will leave it as an exercise to the reader to figure out how it works, with the hint that recursion is a really powerful way to parse recursive structures.
def parse(s: String,
c: Char = 'a', out: Map[Char, String] = Map() ): Option[Map[Char, String]] =
"""\([^\(\)]*\)""".r.findFirstIn(s) match {
case Some(m) => parse(s.replace(m, c.toString), (c + 1).toChar , out + (c -> m))
case None if s.length == 1 => Some(out)
case _ => None
}
This outputs an Option containing a Map if it parses, which is better than throwing an exception if it doesn't. I suspect you really wanted a map from Char to the String, so that's what this outputs. c and out are default parameters so you don't need to input them yourself. The regex just means "any number of characters that aren't parens, eclosed in parens" (the paren characters need to be escaped with "\"). findFirstIn finds the first match and returns an Option[String], which we can pattern match on, replacing that string with the relevant character.
val s = "((2((x+3)+6)))"
parse(s) //Some(Map(a -> (x+3), b -> (a+6), c -> (2b), d -> (c)))
parse("(a(aa))(a)") //None
I have a file with function prototypes like this:
int func1(type1 arg, int x);
type2 funct2(int z, char* buffer);
I want to create a script (bash, sed, awk, whatever) that will print
function = func1 // first argument type = type1// second argument type = int
function = func1 // first argument type = int// second argument type = char*
In other words, tokenize every line and print the function names and arguments. Additionally I would like to hold these tokens as variables to print them later, eg echo $4.
An alternative approach would be to compile with "-g" and read the debug information.
This answer may help you read the debug information and figure out function parameters (it's Python, not bash, but I'd recommend using Python or Perl instead of bash anyway).
The resulting solution would be much more robust than anything based on text parsing. It will deal with all the different ways in which a function might be defined, and even with crazy things like functions defined in macros.
To convince you better (or help you get it right if you're not convinced), here's a list of test cases that may break your parsing:
// Many lines
const
char
*
f
(
int
x
)
{
}
// Count parenthesis!
void f(void (*f)(void *f)) {}
// Old style
void f(a, b)
int a;
char *b
{
}
// Not a function
int f=sizeof(int);
// Nesting
int f() {
int g() { return 1; }
return g();
}
// Just one
void f(int x /*, int y */) { }
// what if?
void (int x
#ifdef ALSO_Y
, int y
#endif
) { }
// A function called __attribute__?
static int __attribute__((always_inline)) f(int x) {}
here's a start.
#!/bin/bash
#bash 3.2+
while read -r line
do
line="${line#* }"
[[ $line =~ "^(.*)\((.*)\)" ]]
echo "function: ${BASH_REMATCH[1]}"
echo "args: ${BASH_REMATCH[2]}"
ARGS=${BASH_REMATCH[2]}
FUNCTION=${BASH_REMATCH[1]}
# break down the arguments further.
set -- $ARGS
echo "first arg type:$1 , second arg type: $2"
done <"file"
output
$ ./shell.sh
function: func1
args: type1 arg, int x
first arg type:type1 , second arg type: arg,
function: funct2
args: int z, char* buffer
first arg type:int , second arg type: z,