I have a .html file that is working perfectly fine but for some reason Sublime 3 decides that it has invalid code, check the image below:
Any idea why that's happening and how to fix it without having to modify the code?
The HTML5 spec states (my emphasis):
Comments must start with the four character sequence U+003C LESS-THAN SIGN, U+0021 EXCLAMATION MARK, U+002D HYPHEN-MINUS, U+002D HYPHEN-MINUS (<!--). Following this sequence, the comment may have text, with the additional restriction that the text must not start with a single > (U+003E) character, nor start with a U+002D HYPHEN-MINUS character (-) followed by a > (U+003E) character,
nor contain two consecutive U+002D HYPHEN-MINUS characters (--),
nor end with a U+002D HYPHEN-MINUS character (-). Finally, the comment must be ended by the three character sequence U+002D HYPHEN-MINUS, U+002D HYPHEN-MINUS, U+003E GREATER-THAN SIGN (-->).
So that's why it's complaining. As to how to fix it without changing the code, that's trickier.
Your contention that it works is no different really to C developers wondering why they need to worry about undefined behaviour because the code they wrote works fine. The fact that it works fine in one particular implementation is not relevant to portable code.
My advice is to actually change the code. It's not valid, after all, and any browser (current or future) would be well within its rights to simply reject it.
As an aside after some historical digging, it appears this is not allowed because SGML, on which HTML was based, had slightly different rules regarding comment.
On sensing the <!-- token, the parser was switched to a comment mode where > characters were actually allowed within the comment. If the -- sequence was encountered, it changed to a different mode where the > would end the comment.
In fact, it appears to have been a toggle switch between those two modes, so something like <!-- >>>>> -- xyzzy -- >>>>> --> was possible, but putting a > where the xyzzy would end the comment.
XML, for one, didn't adopt this behaviour and HTML has now modified it to follow the "don't use -- within comments at all" rule, the reason being that hardly anyone knew that the comments behaved in the SGML way, causing some pain :-)
Related
I have file that has hex content: db90 3031 46, which should be displayed in vim as "ې" followed by "01F", but what I noticed is that it is never displayed correctly. Then I noticed It is the same in other places like in terminal and browser I always get ې01F? Why is that? Just paste that in google and try yourself you will never be able to put "ې" and 0 as next character.
That's an Arabic character with right-to-left indicator, so you probably need to switch back to left-to-right mode, such as with U+200e.
The Unicode bidirectional stuff is rather complex - the behaviour you are seeing is probably caused by the fact that the Latin digits are marked EN = European number (a weak type), while letters such as F are marked L = left to right (a strong type).
Weak types are treated differently in the Unicode specification, such as with this quote which covers your particular case (my emphasis):
Problematic cases may occur when a right-to-left paragraph begins with left-to-right characters, or there are nested segments of different-direction text, or there are weak characters on directional boundaries. In these cases, embeddings or directional marks may be required to get the right display.
So your code point followed by a digit renders as "ې7" (I typed that 7 in after the Arabic character despite the fact it's showing up before it), while following it with a letter gives "ېX".
For what it's worth, the text "ې7" was generated here by inserting between the two characters, the HTML equivalent of the U+200e Unicode code point.
If you head on over to this UTF-8 codec site and enter %u06D0%u200e7 into the decoding section, you'll see that it comes out in your desired order (removing the %200e shows it in the order you're describing in your question).
I've setup auto-completions for parentheses and double quotes following the directions on this page.
The auto closing for single quotes is a bit more complicated, however. When dealing with single quotes, I have to check if it is used as an apostrophe or as a quote. The criteria for an apostrophe would perhaps be when the single quote is immediately preceded by an alphabet or number.
How do I implement this setting in my vimrc?
Well, the details of that algorithm depend on the type of text (programming languages vs. prose) and individual tradeoffs. I'd recommend to study how the 6+ plugins listed on the mentioned page handle that; the different approaches are probably quite instructive.
Maybe you'll also find information how some popular IDEs implement this (at least for the open Eclipse, this information should be available).
Using this will help
ino ' ''<left>
If you dont't want completion Ctrl-v need to be typed prior to '.
Not exactly what you are looking but a way to work without complex logic at the cost of extra key stroke
i. The Problem
My goal is something like the following:
I have a line of text like
Who left the dead mouse in the fridge?
and I want to highlight the first the in green, just this one occurrence. That is, I don't want to syn match ThisMagicWord "\<the\>" or anything that will overzealously highlight other thes.
There is one other requirement, which is that if the user edits the other text on the line, say to
Who on earth left the delicious dead mouse in the fridge?
the highlighting will track with the word the, so long as the user doesn't edit that one particular word.
ii. The Kludge
Now, I have a solution to this. In fact, I am proud of my solution, because it was tricky to think up. But it is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a good solution.
It turns out that the Unicode character Combining Grapheme Joiner is effectively a no-op in Vim. It produces no glyph, and takes up no width. It is the only such character that I have discovered. So what I do is, I surreptitiously edit the line in question to be
Who left the<CGJ> dead mouse in the fridge?
and then define a rule
syn match ThisMagicWord "the<CGJ>"
I will additionally trigger on BufWritePre and BufWritePost to strip the CGJs out of the file on disk.
iii. The Questions
Is there a no-op character in Vim (or a way to produce one) other than CGJ? Ideally a non-combining character, since the<CGJ> will not match a search for /the, due to the way Vim regexes handle combining characters.
Is there a better way to get at the behavior that I want?
You're right that there's currently no good way to mark static matches and keep them up-to-date when edits are done nearby. My approach would have been worse than your kludge: Include the line / column information in the match (via the \%l and \%v special atoms), and attempting to update those with a combination of marks (works for line changes) and intra-line custom diffing.
Though your use of special Unicode characters is clever, it's (as you admit) a hack. I've asked you for uses in the comments, and am still not completely satisfied / convinced. If you can come up with good, real use cases and current pain points, please direct them to the vim_dev mailing list (best with a functional draft patch attached). The functionality to keep track of such text is basically there (in the Vim internals), it's just not yet tracked and exposed to users / Vimscript. Though Vim development has been (often frustratingly) slow, with a compelling argument on your side, new functionality can and does happen.
How about using marks?
Move the cursor to the word you want, set a lowercase letter mark (e.g. mz), then add highlighting for the word like \%'zthe
So oftentimes, while editing with Vim, I'll get into a variety of situations where whitespace gives me hassle. For example, say I have a comment like this:
#This program was featured on the Today show, it is an algorithm for promoting world peace in third-world countries
#given the name of that country and the name of a celebrity to endorse its cause
If I want to, for example, trim the lines so they go to X characters, I end up putting a newline somewhere in the middle of the top line to get this (after hitting the newline and auto-indenting):
#This program was featured on the Today show, it is an algorithm for promoting
world peace in third-world countries
#given the name of that country and the name of a celebrity to endorse its cause
I then add a # to the beginning of the line, and that's all well and good, but then I want that line to line up, too. To do so, I have to delete the newline, all the whitespace for the indent on the next line, and then the commenting # mark. It doesn't take an awfully long amount of time to do that, but this and similar situations all add up over a day's worth of coding.
Now the example above is pretty specific, but my question isn't. What's a good way in Vim to delete all whitespace INCLUDING NEWLINES up until the next non-whitespace character? If Vim already has movements that do that, that would be awesome, but if not, does anyone have a favorite Vim function they use to do the above that could be mapped to a key? At the very least, am I missing some Vim usage idiom that prevents me from even having to worry about this case?
EDIT: Formatting to width, while useful and applicable to the case above, isn't the focus of this question. I'm concerned more with whitespace removal that doesn't stop at the end of a line, but instead carries on to the first non-whitespace character of the next line.
You really just want to reformat that comment to fit the current 'textwidth'. If the comment is a paragraph (i.e., separated by a line of whitespace above and below), then you can just use gqip (gq is the reformat command, ip is the "inner-paragraph" text object) to reformat it. If it's not a standalone paragraph, you can visually select those lines and then use gq.
This likely also relies on having 'formatoptions' set correctly to make sure the comment characters are handled properly, but in many cases the ftplugin has already done that.
This is a while later, but I found that there is a command that does what I need to in 90% of circumstances:
J -- join line below to the current one
This command seems to work:
:.s/\W*$\n\W*//g
it uses a replace to remove whitespace up to end of line and the new line at the end.
In this example:
testting aad $
asdjkasdjsdaksddjk$
(to see meta characters in vim use the command :set list)
if you place the cursor on the first line and use the first command it will delete everything from aad to $ (not including aad but including $ and a newline.)
Also, note for what you are doing it is far more efficient to use an external program to format comments for you. In particular, par is a great small C program that edits text and wraps it to desired lengths.
If you have par in your path, to do what you are trying to do is as easy as selecting the block of comment with Shift+v and running the command
:!par 40pgr
where 40 is the desired width in columns.
If you are feeling hackish, write your own program in C/perl/C++/python that edits comments however you like, then put it in path and use the external filter command :! to process blocks of text through it.
Using vim 7.2.330 on a Ubuntu host from an XP host, I'm stuck at how to type/paste the following line in a text file:
include_once(‘/full/path/to/app’);
The document says it's important to use ASCII 145 and 146, but vim turns them into "<92><93>", and Nano turns them into �.
Note that I'm using a European keyboard layout, not the US layout.
Does someone know how to solve this?
Thank you.
Er, you should not be using the 2 types of special quotes for string quoting in PHP.
You should be typing
include_once('/full/path/to/app');
( That's ASCII character 39 )
This is not what it says at the end of
this document:
www.wpbbpthemes.org/integration/
"beware some pasting of this code make
the ‘ character change, make sure it’s
the button left of the enter key on
your [US] keyboard"
No, you are misinterpreting it. Lots of software in windows, and varying keyboards, erroneously do "smart quotes". Word and Internet Explorer are such examples. As a result, copy-pasting from these applications results in the wrong type of character in your source code, often conflicting with the content-encoding the document is served as, which renders on the displaying browser as a silly Ä or similar character.
Do not use characters 145 and 146 in your PHP source, it is not necessary, and it won't work.
Also, Important to note, the authors of that page have USED THE WRONG QUOTES IN THEIR EXAMPLES and as such, WILL NOT WORK AS STATED.
Their statement with regard to "beware some pasting will make the character change" is bogusly incorrect, they have the incorrect character in their source, and as such, copy-pasting it at any time will not work.