I'm using flycheck and haskell-hlint in emacs when I write Haskell codes
and I think it will be great if I can apply those hlint suggestions by invoking some emacs procedures instead of modifying the code manually.
If there isn't one available and in case I have to write this procedure for myself:
Is it guaranteed that hlint output is always of the following form:
Found:
{Text1}
Why not:
{Text2}
where {Text?} can always be parsed as a Haskell abstract syntax tree?
HLint comes with an Emacs script hs-lint.el that does the replacement you are after, details are in the README. The script isn't officially supported by the HLint developer, but some people have had some success with it.
Separately, there are plans to provide a proper replacement feature in HLint, which if provided would be easy to integrate with Emacs. While it's always been on the back-burner, there are now people working on the necessary whitespace-aware-syntax-replacement libraries that HLint requires.
There is an HLint Refactor Mode building on the apply-refact tool that provides HLint replacements in Emacs.
Related
I have a cmake project. I want to do the following easily
search the declaration, definition and references of any variable, function, etc. under the cursor, which may be declared in an external header file whose path is added using INCLUDE_DIRECTORIES in CMakeLists.txt
rename a variable, function, etc. that is declared in the project
How can I set this up?
You can try to use vim plugin cmake4vim in order to integrate CMake to Vim.
This plugin helps to work with cmake targets and allows to generate compilation database file (compile_commands.json). A lot of plugins use this file for code completion, jump to definition and etc. (for example YCM)
Also you can use vim lsp plugins (for example vim-lsp) these plugins use language servers for code completion, refactoring and another good features.
But CMake project integration (cmake cache generation, project compilation, etc.) and search the declaration, definition and etc are different tasks. And different plugins and tools solve these tasks.
You can tell Vim where to look for includes by adding entries to the path option. I don't have enough experience with Cmake to know how to pull paths from CMakeLists.txt, though.
See :help 'path'.
Assuming a properly set path, it is possible to use the built-in :dsearch and related commands to search for definitions across includes.
The define option has a prescriptive name but it could be used to find any specific pattern so you could alter it to match declarations, too, or really anything.
See :help include-search and :help 'define'.
Vim has no built-in concept of "reference". :isearch and friends should work for that but they will probably be too noisy.
Renaming is usually done with something like:
:grep foo paths
:cwindow
:cdo s/foo/bar/gc
YouCompleteMe will help you. It uses compilation_database.json, witch can be generated by cmake.
This plugin also provides autocompetion for many languages.
I use functions in vim and assign them to a hotkey.
https://developer.ibm.com/tutorials/l-vim-script-2/
it gives you more an IDE feel. but at the end of the day you get a bit more control.
Thus far I have installed exuberant-ctags from synaptic, and also attained the older version before exuberant: http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=610
First of all, do I need both? I would rather just use exuberant, if possible.
Furthermore, I am attempting to utilize the following script to auto-generate tags (which isn't working):
http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/Autocmd_to_update_ctags_file
I checked out the post at : Vim auto-generate ctags
and alot of people use easytags (which I made a post about since I could not get it to work).
Any suggestions for auto writing of tags?
Thank you
The first plugin in your question is not the old ctags that was deprecated by exuberant ctags: it's just one of the many vim plugins written to interact with ctags. And it does the generation too.
Technically, you don't need any plugin to make vim work with ctags, :help tags and :help ctags have a lot of useful info, read them.
There are many other tag generation plugins (some are listed in the answers to the question you linked to): try them all and make your decision based on your experience/needs.
In the future, try to make your questions clearer and more focused (what did you try, what worked, what files...).
In eclipse, if you change a variable name, eclipse will automatically change this variable's name in whole project.
Can vim do that too?
Vim is a text editor, not an IDE. Though it has some notion of a filetype's syntax, it does not fully parse nor understand the language's full syntax. Refactorings, even simple ones like Rename identifier, do require such full understanding (to be 100% correct).
There are attempts at refactoring support in Vim, most language-specific, some also generic. But I'd advise to keep using a real IDE for this (for its comfort, safety, and correctness), and instead use Vim only for simple, text-based replacements, using :bufdo substitute/... or macros, as described here.
Sort of.
Because it is not an IDE and thus doesn't understand anything about your code, Vim only sees text where you see a variable name. It can't infer anything from the scope or whatever. Without the use of some external program, renaming a variable in Vim is usually done with a buffer-wide or project-wide search/replace.
Since you didn't tell us what language you are working with we can't tell you if there is a language-specific solution for your needs.
try this plugin -> Clighter, for c-family rename-refactoring. It's based on clang, but there are limitations. Still in development
Recently, i gave up Taglist for Tagbar. Tagbar works as expected for all languages except PHP.
It lists class, methods and variables into their respective categories instead of displaying methods and variables into their respective scope.
I came to know that ctags has poor support for PHP.
Is there any way to improve ctags and Tagbar's support for PHP? I am hopping for some kind of hack or tweak, or any other way around.
I have just using PHP_Parser as syntax parsing backend written a tool called phpctags to generate ctags compatiable index file and an addon plugin for tagbar called tagbar-phpctags to enhance the PHP suport for tagbar.
Methods and properties even local variables assigned in functions could be listed in their own scope now as well as their access information.
Maybe these could help.
Unfortunately there is no easy answer to this. The ctags PHP parser just uses regular expressions, and the result -- as you noticed -- is that support for scopes is missing.
There would be two ways to get proper scope support working: someone has to write either an actual recursive parser module for ctags, or some other program that can output tags in a ctags compatible format. That could theoretically even be written in PHP, which might make it easier -- maybe there already is some functionality available that allows access to the AST, which would then just need to be printed out in the correct format. But until someone does that I'm afraid there's no real way to properly display PHP scopes in Tagbar, since it has to rely on the information that ctags hands to it.
It is a simple question to which I am not able to find the answer:
Given a LaTeX command, how do I find out what package(s) it belongs to or comes from?
For example, given the \qquad horizontal spacing command, what package does it come from? Especially troublesome since it works without including any package!
Given a LaTeX command, how do I find out what package(s) it belongs to or comes from?
Consult your references:
If it's in the index to the TeXbook, it's inherited from TeX, the engine that drives LaTeX.
Otherwise, if it's in the index to the LaTeX manual, it's probably defined in latex.ltx or in one of the standard class files, not in a package.
Otherwise, if it's in the index to The LaTeX Companion, the page number probably tells you what package it's from.
Otherwise, you could do some fancy grepping on the results of find /usr/share/texmf -name '*.sty', but be prepared for a painful exercise.
Or, you could ask on http://stackoverflow.com. But then some idiot will respond by asking why you want to know...
You can search http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/info/symbols/comprehensive/ for that information and more.
Remember that LaTeX is a macro language on top of TeX, and all the macros are made up of TeX which doesn't need to be imported. \qquad is in that category.
As far as I know, there is no really good general answer to this. But there are a number of techniques you might try for any given command. In the case of \qquad, it's part of basic TeX. Remember that you can always use TeX in interactive mode:
$ tex '\show\qquad'
This is TeX, Version 3.141592 (Web2C 7.5.6)
> \qquad=macro:
->\hskip 2em\relax .
\show\qquad
? x
No pages of output.
Some macros are added by LaTeX on top of TeX, such as \begin:
$ tex '\show\begin'
This is TeX, Version 3.141592 (Web2C 7.5.6)
> \begin=undefined.
\show\begin
? x
No pages of output.
whereas
$ latex '\show\begin'
This is pdfTeXk, Version 3.141592-1.40.3 (Web2C 7.5.6)
%&-line parsing enabled.
entering extended mode
LaTeX2e
Babel and hyphenation patterns for english, usenglishmax, dumylang, noh
yphenation, greek, monogreek, ancientgreek, ibycus, pinyin, loaded.
> \begin=macro:
#1->\#ifundefined {#1}{\def \reserved#a {\#latex#error {Environment #1 undefine
d}\#eha }}{\def \reserved#a {\def \#currenvir {#1}\edef \#currenvline {\on#line
}\csname #1\endcsname }}\#ignorefalse \begingroup \#endpefalse \reserved#a .
\show\begin
? x
No pages of output.
Everything else comes from packages. If you really wanna know which package a macro comes from (other than by google or grepping your texmf tree), you can check after each package you load whether it's defined. Try defining this before any \usepackage commands:
\let\oldusepackage\usepackage
\renewcommand\usepackage[1]{
\oldusepackage{#1}
\ifcsname includegraphics\endcsname
\message{^^Jincludegraphics is defined in #1^^J}
\let\usepackage\oldusepackage
\fi}
Then when you run latex on your .tex file, look for a line in the output that says includegraphics is defined in graphicx. It's not likely, but some devious packages might do bad things with \usepackage so there's a chance this might not work. Another alternative would be to simply define the command you're interested in before loading any packages:
\newcommand\includegraphics{}
Then you might get an error message when the package that defines the command is loading. This is actually less reliable than the former approach, since many packages use \def and \let to define their macros rather than \newcommand, bypassing the "already-defined" check. You could also just insert a check by hand in between each load: \ifcsname includegraphics\endcsname\message{^^Jdefined after graphicx^^J}\fi
Due to lack of reputation I cannot comment on Steve's answer, which was very helpful to me, but I would like to extend it a bit.
First, in his second approach (fiddling with usepackage) the case where usepackage has optional arguments is not dealt with. Secondly, packages are often loaded by other packages via RequirePackage which makes it hard to find the actual place of definition of a command. So my refinement of Steve's answer is:
\usepackage{xargs}
\let\oldusepackage\usepackage
\let\oldRequirePackage\RequirePackage
\renewcommandx{\usepackage}[3][1,3]{
\oldusepackage[#1]{#2}[#3]
\ifcsname includegraphics\endcsname
\message{^^Jincludegraphics is defined in #2^^J}
\let\usepackage\oldusepackage
\let\RequirePackage\oldRequirePackage
\fi}
\renewcommandx{\RequirePackage}[3][1,3]{
\oldRequirePackage[#1]{#2}[#3]
\ifcsname includegraphics\endcsname
\message{^^Jincludegraphics is defined in #2^^J}
\let\usepackage\oldusepackage
\let\RequirePackage\oldRequirePackage
\fi}
The xargs package is used here to get the unusual options of usepackage right (first and third parameter are optional).
Putting this directly after documentclass should tell where includegraphics is defined.