I would like to create a kind of swiss-knife tool for a specific domain, and a "cabal" or "darcs" command-line interface looks perfect.
Using the on-line tutorials I could implement a simple "hello, world" program. Then I implemented a more sophisticated solution with modes and all when well.
But now, I would like to explore the "sub-modes" to have a good understanding of all the possibilities, and I'm stuck. I could not find any tutorial, example or detailed description of the feature.
How to implement and use the submodes feature?
I want to clarify that I understand modes, but it's really the submodes that are not clear to me.
As mentioned above, CmdArgs: Easy Command Line Processing, linked from the project home page, is the place to start. It includes some examples; if they are unclear I'd fetch their full code and play around with it.
The also-mentioned search results include Haskell: Using CmdArgs (Single and Multi-Mode) and Building a Haskell CLI Utility with CmdArgs.
hledger's use of cmdargs is another example. It's a bit more complicated, allowing modes to be imported and reused across multiple executables.
The cmdargs tutorial has examples for sub-modes. The documentation for the modes function is also clear.
In fact, a Google search for "cmdargs modes" reveals quite a few more tutorials covering exactly this.
Related
I am having a very difficult time finding any documentation about how the various parts of the Inno Setup Wizardform are hooked together.
Using various answers here on StackOVerflow I have gathered some information but most of the time these are inferences rather and I'm not confident I really have a good grasp.
I have looked at the online help available at http://www.jrsoftware.org/ishelp/index.php and specifically the section on Support Classes Reference but it just gives me a list of all the parts of the wizard form. I really would like more information about how things like the InstallingPage and the InnerPage relate. I've looked through the listing of topics as well and nothing appears to relate to the question I have.
I'm just having a very difficult time grasping how all of those various parts hook together and where each part is in a hierarchy either visual or logical.
I guess I could go look at the source code for Inno Setup but I thought it'd be worth asking here first before diving into an unfamiliar code base in a language I've only been poking at for two days. If that is my only recourse, I guess I'll have to.
I would like more information about how things like the InstallingPage and the InnerPage relate.
No, WizardForm internals are not documented.
You might read the source.
A code search reveals that the search terms do not occur that often.
https://github.com/jrsoftware/issrc/search?q=InnerPage
https://github.com/jrsoftware/issrc/search?q=InstallingPage
This is the source for the Wizard itself and it's form.
The pages are hooked together via RegisterExistingPage().
I would like to use a text-based UI in my Haskell program. I found some bindings for the ncurses library (see also hscurses or ncurses, which one to use?). The hscurses and nanocurses packages are just simple wrappers around the C library, while vty isn't very well documented and a bit ugly (for example mixing snake_case and CamelCase).
The ncurses library on Hackage looks much more pretty and provides API which nicely fits Haskell. The problem is that it doesn't seem to implement some crucial features, like resizing or refreshing the windows.
So my question is:
is there any other Haskell text UI library, either ncurses-based or not, which I missed?
if there isn't anyone, is it possible to extend the ncurses Haskell library to at least support window refreshing and resizing? (this should be probably consulted with the project owner, but I need the solution quickly)
EDIT:
I finally used nscurses without windows (and panels) to avoid the troubles with refreshing them. I had problems with output to bottom-right corner of a window (a very similar issue was reported for Python's ncurses binding). I solved it by not writing there :).
Have you looked at vty-ui? It has a very nice user manual with lots of examples. I believe it's essentially a wrapper around vty.
I've used nanoncurses and hscurses succesfully, my hmp3 app has a binding that was the basis for nanocurses.
No matter what you probably will want a nice high level API. hscurses does have a box abstraction at least.
You'd be fine going with hscurses.
There is another good choice for Text-based user interfaces in haskell;
Brick is written by jtdaugherty, the same person that developed vty-ui which is Deprecated now.
The API is Declarative, which is Better for Presenting a language like Haskell.
also the Documentation was great and complete.
I need a set of key-value pairs for configuration read in from a file. I tried using show on a Data.Map and it doesn't look at all like what I want. It seems this is something many others might have already done so I'm wondering if there is a standard way to do it and what library to use.
Go to hackage.
Click on "packages"
Search for "config".
Notice ConfigFile(TH), EEConfig, and tconfig.
Read the Haddock documentation
Select a couple and implement your task.
Blog about your findings so the rest of us can learn from your new found expertise (thanks!).
EDIT:
I've recently used configurator - which was easy enough. I suggest you try that one!
(Yes, yes. If I took my own advice I would have made a blog for you all)
The configuration category on Hackage should list all relevant libraries:
http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/#cat:Configuration
I have researched the topic myself now, and my conclusion is:
configurator is very good, but it's currently only for user-edited configurations. The application only reads the configuration and cannot modify it. So it's more for server-side applications.
tconfig has a a simple API and looked like it was what I wanted, maybe a bit raw, until I realized it's unmaintained and that some commits which are really important to use the app are applied on github but the hackage package was not updated
Other solutions didn't look like they'd work for me, I didn't like the API, but every application (and tastes) are different.
I think using JSON for instance is not a good solution because at least with Aeson when you add new settings in a new release, the old JSON without the new member from the previous version won't load. Also, i find that solution a bit verbose.
The conclusion of my research is that I wrote my own library, app-settings, which aims to be key-value, read-write, with a as succint and type-safe API as possible. And you'll find it also in the hackage links for the configurations category that I gave.
So to summarize, I think configurator is the standard for read-only configurations (and it's very powerful too, you can split the configuration file with imports for instance). For read-write there are many small libraries, some unmaintained, and no real standard I think.
UPDATE 2018 be sure to look at dhall
I'd also suggest just using Text.JSON or one of the yaml libraries available (I prefer JSON myself, but...).
The configfile package looks like what you want.
I need to document the software I'm currently working on. The software consists of several programming languages and scripts which got me thinking. If a new developers comes along and needs to fix something, they might know Java but maybe not bash scripting. It would be nice if there was a program which would help to understand what
for f in "$#" ; do
means. I was thinking of something that creates a static HTML page with the code plus syntax highlighting and if you hover over something (like the "for"), it would display a pop-up with an explanation:
for starts a loop which iterates over all values that follow in. In the loop, you can access each value via the variable $f. The loop body is between do and done
Does something like that already exist?
[EDIT] This is just an example. You'll get another help for f, in, "$#", ; and do, i.e. each and every element of the line should be explained. Unknown elements (like command names) should link to Google. So you can understand what it does even if you're missing some detail.
[EDIT2] I'm aware that you can't write a program which understands what another program does. What I'm looking for is a simple tool which will do "extended syntax highlighting" in the sense that it will color an expression and give a short explanation what it means (plus maybe a link to some in-depth reference).
This is meant for someone who knows how to program but maybe hasn't seen some obscure construct before. Say
echo "Error" 1>&2
Every bash programmer knows what this means but a Java developer might be puzzled by the 1>&2 despite the fact that they can guess that echo == System.out.println. A simple "Redirects stdout to stderr" will clear things up and give that instant "AHA!" which allows them to stay in their current train of thought.
A tool like this could be built using ANTLR, i.e. parse the code into an abstract syntax tree using an ANTLR grammar for that language, and write an HTML generator which produced the annotated code.
It sounds like a useful tool to have for language learning, or exploring source code of projects you're not maintaining -- but is it appropriate for documentation?
Why is it important to help the programmers of other languages understand the code at this level of implementation detail? Anyone maintaining the implementation at this level will obviously have to know the language and will probably have an IDE to do most of this.
That said, I'd definitely consider a tool like this as a learning aid.
IMO it would be simpler and more effective to just collect links to good language-specific references and tutorials on a Wiki page.
For all mainstream languages, such sources exist and are maintained regularly. If you try to create your own reference, you need to maintain it too. Fair enough, bash syntax is not going to change very often, but other languages do develop faster, so it is going to be a burden.
If you think about it, it's not that useful to have a tool that explains the syntax. Developers could just google for keywords instead of browsing a website in a similar fashion to http://www.codeweblog.com/source/ .
I believe that good comments will be by far more useful, plus there are tools to extract the documentation by using the comments (for example, HappyDoc does that for Python).
It is a very tricky thing. First of all by definition it can be proven that program that will "understand" any program down't exist. However, you can still use existing documentation. Maybe using tools like Doxygen can help you. You would need to document your code through comments and the documentation will be generated from them.
A language cannot be explained only through its syntax. The runtime environment plays a great part, together with the underlying philosophy of the language and libraies.
Moreover, syntax is not that complex for most common languages (given that code has been written with maintainability in mind).
Going on with bash example, you cannot deeply understand bash if you know nothing about processes & job control, environment variables, a big list of unix commands (tr, sort, cut, paste, sed, awk, find, ...) and many other features that don't appear in syntax.
If the tool produced
for starts a loop which iterates over
all values that follow in. In the
loop, you can access each value via
the variable $f. The loop body is
between do and done
it would be pretty worthless. This is exactly the kind of comment that trainee (human) programmers are told nver to write.
The title may seem slightly self-contradictory, and I accept that you can't really learn a language quickly. However, an experienced programmer that already has knowledge of a few languagues and different styles (functional, OO, imperative etc.) often wants to get started quickly. I've seen a few websites doing effective "translations" in the form of "just show me syntax equivalence". I can't remember the sites now, but for related languages (e.g. Perl/PHP) it's quite common.
Is there a better resource that covers more languages? Is there a resource that covers idioms as well as syntax? I think this would be incredibly useful for doing small amounts of work on existing code bases where you are not familiar with the language. Looking at the existing code, as we know, is not always a good indicator of quality. Likewise, for "learn by doing" weekend project I always have the urge to write reasonably idiomatic, clean code from the start. Such a resource could also link to known good example projects of varying sizes for those that prefer to learn by reading. Reading a well-written medium sized code base can also be much more practical when access to development environments might be limited.
I think it's possible to find tutorials and summaries for individual languages that provide some of this functionality in disparate web locations but I'm hoping there is a good, centralised, comparative place that the busy programmer can turn to.
You generally have two main things to overcome:
Syntax
Reference
Syntax you can pick up fairly quickly with a language tutorial and a stack of samplecode.
Reference (library/API calls) you need to find a proper guide to; perhaps the language reference, or perhaps google...
With those two in place, following a walkthrough (to get you used to using the development environment) will have you pretty much ready - you'll be able to look up what you want to say (reference), and know how to say it (syntax).
This, of course, applies principally to procedural/oop languages; languages that require a paradigm switch (ML/Haskell) you should go to lectures for ;)
(and for the weirder moments, there's SO!)
In the past my favour was "learning by doing". So e.g. I know a little bit of C++ and a lot of C#.Net but I must write a FTP Tool in Python.
So I sit for an hour and so the syntax differences by a tutorial, than I develop the form itself and look at the generated code. Then I search a open source Python FTP Client and get pieces of code (Not copy and paste, write it self to see, feel and remember the code!)
After a few hours I get it.
So: The mix is the best. A book, a piece of good code, the willing to learn and a free night with much coffee.
At the risk of sounding cheesy, I would start with the language's website tutorial and/or FAQ, followed by asking more specific questions here. SO is my centralized location for programming knowledge.
I remember when I learned Perl. I was asked to modify some Perl code at work and I'd never seen the language before. I had experience with several other languages, however, so it wasn't hard to figure out the syntax with the online Perl docs in one window and the code in another, side-by-side. I don't know that solely reading existing code is necessarily the best way to learn. In my case, I didn't know Perl but I could tell that the person who originally wrote the code didn't know Perl either. I'm not sure I could've distinguished between good Perl and really confusing Perl. It would've been nice to be able to ask questions here at the time.
Language isn't important. What is important is learning your ways around designing algorithms and the proper application of design patterns. Focus on the technique, not the language that implements a certain technique. Once you understand the proper development techniques, any programming language will just become real easy, no matter how obscure they are...
When you put a focus on a language, you're restricting your own knowledge.
http://devcheatsheet.com/ seems to be a step in the right direction: it aggregates cheat sheets/quick references and they are (somewhat) manually reviewed. It's also wide-ranging. It still comes up short a bit in terms of "idiomatic" quick reference: for example, the page on Ruby doesn't mention yield.
Rosetta Code appears to be an excellent resource that includes hints on coding idiomatically and moves from simple (like for-loops) to things like drawing. I haven't checked out how comprehensive it is, but there are a large number of languages and tasks listed. The drawbacks re: original question are:
Some of the linking is not accurate
(navigating Python->ForLoop will
take you to the top of the ForLoop
page, not the Python section). It's a
wiki, this can be improved.
Ideally you could "slice" the wiki
however you chose to see e.g. the top
20 tasks for two languages
side-by-side.
http://hyperpolyglot.org/ seems to be an almost perfect match for what I was looking for. The quality is not always there, or idiom can be lacking, but it has the same intention and is pretty comprehensive.