A program that loads and processes command-line arguments should be created.
Here comes a few examples on how it should look when you run it (bold text is the text that the user will type):
Terminal prompt % **./my_program**
No arguments given.
Terminal prompt % **./my_program 123**
Wrong amounts of arguments given.
Terminal prompt % **./my_program 10 XYZ 999 Greetings!**
Wrong amounts of arguments given.
Terminal prompt % **./my_program 3 HELLO**
Message: HELLOHELLOHELLO
The program "./my program" is ending.
Terminal prompt % **./my_program 0 Bye**
Message:
The program "./my program" is ending.
This is my code so far:
with Ada.Text_IO; use Ada.text_IO;
with Ada.Integer_Text_IO; use Ada.Integer_Text_IO;
with Ada.Command_Line; use Ada.Command_Line;
procedure my_program is
type String is array (Positive) of Character;
N : Integer;
Text : String;
begin
N := Argument_Count;
if N = 0 then
Put_Line("No arguments given.");
elsif N /= 2 then
Put_Line("Wrong number of arguments given.");
elsif N = 2 then
Put("Message: ");
for I in 1 .. N loop
Put(Text);
New_Line;
end loop;
Put("The program """);
Put(""" is ending. ");
end if;
end my_program;
My program handles the first 3 three cases but when I go ahead with the 4th and 5th (last) case I get an error code at the row Put(Text) where it says
Missing argument for parameter "Item" in call to "Put"
I don't know if I declared my string right because I don't want a string of a specific length. Can anyone come up with something that could help me solve case 4 and 5? It would be nice and highly appreciated
This seems to be a homework or exam question, so I would usually not provide a full answer. But Chris already gave that (with some defects), so here is my suggestion. Compared to Chris's solution, I try to avoid using unnecessary variables, and I favour case statements over if-then-else cascades, and I try to reduce the scope of exception handlers. I prefer to put use clauses in the subprogram so that the context-clause section contains only with clauses. I use the string-multiplying "*" operator from Ada.Strings.Fixed, but that is perhaps an unnecessary refinement.
with Ada.Command_Line;
with Ada.Strings.Fixed;
with Ada.Text_IO;
procedure My_Program
is
use Ada.Strings.Fixed;
use Ada.Text_IO;
begin
case Ada.Command_Line.Argument_Count is
when 0 =>
Put_Line ("No arguments given.");
when 2 =>
begin
Put_Line (
Natural'Value (Ada.Command_Line.Argument(1))
* Ada.Command_Line.Argument(2));
exception
when Constraint_Error =>
Put_Line ("Invalid input for argument 1.");
end;
when others =>
Put_Line ("Wrong amount of arguments given.");
end case;
Put_Line (
"The program """
& Ada.Command_Line.Command_Name
& """ is ending.");
end My_Program;
Note that my version:
Rejects negative first arguments (like "-3").
Outputs the repeated strings on a single line, as was required by the examples given.
Includes the name of the program in the final message, as was also required.
Given the clarification in comments as to the purpose of the program, to print a message n times where n is the first argument, and the message is the second argument, you need to parse the first argument as an integer. This can be done with Integer'Value.
Now, that raises the prospect of the user not running the program with an integer. So we have to handle the possible Constraint_Error exception.
with Ada.Text_IO; use Ada.text_IO;
with Ada.Integer_Text_IO; use Ada.Integer_Text_IO;
with Ada.Command_Line; use Ada.Command_Line;
procedure my_program is
argc : Integer;
N : Integer;
begin
argc := Argument_Count;
if argc = 0 then
Put_Line("No arguments given.");
elsif argc /= 2 then
Put_Line("Wrong number of arguments given.");
else
n := Integer'Value(Argument(1));
Put("Message: ");
for I in 1 .. N loop
Put_Line(Argument(2));
end loop;
Put("The program """);
Put(""" is ending. ");
end if;
exception
when Constraint_Error =>
Put_Line("Invalid input for argument 1.");
end my_program;
As an aside, when we've checked in our conditional if argc is zero, and that it doesn't equal two, we don't have to use elsif. The only other possibility is that it is 2.
You say
My program handles the first 3 three cases but when I go ahead with the 4th and 5th (last) case I get an error code at the row Put(Text) where it says "Missing argument for parameter "Item" in call to "Put". "
which doesn't make sense, because your program as shown doesn't compile. I guess what you mean is "when I try to add the code to handle cases 4 and 5, it doesn't compile".
The reason why it doesn’t compile is hidden in the actual error messages:
leun.adb:24:10: no candidate interpretations match the actuals:
leun.adb:24:10: missing argument for parameter "Item" in call to "put" declared at a-tiinio.ads:97, instance at a-inteio.ads:18
...
leun.adb:24:14: expected type "Standard.Integer"
leun.adb:24:14: found type "String" defined at line 7
leun.adb:24:14: ==> in call to "Put" at a-tiinio.ads:80, instance at a-inteio.
You have at line 7
type String is array (Positive) of Character;
which is both misleading and not what you meant.
It’s ’not what you meant’ because array (Positive) means an array of fixed length from 1 to Positive’Last, which will not fit into your computer’s memory. What you meant is array (Positive range <>).
Even with this correction, it's 'misleading' because although it would be textually the same as the declaration of the standard String in ARM 3.6.3(4), in Ada two different type declarations declare two different types. So, when you write Put(Text); the Put that you meant to call (the second in ARM A.10.7(16)) doesn’t match because it’s expecting a parameter of type Standard.String but Text is of type my_program.String.
Cure for this problem: don’t declare your own String type.
Related
I have declared an array
type datastream is array(0 to 10) of signed (5 downto 0);
For simulation, I want to display the array as integer-numbers
So I created
type datastream_int is array(0 to 10) of integer;
and
signal DIN_ARRAY: datastream;
signal DIN_ARRAY_int: datastream_int;
...
DIN_ARRAY_real <= datastream_int(DIN_ARRAY);
But it fails. How to convert it? Dont want to use a for loop
The numeric_std package, that I assume you are using, provides a to_integer function to convert from a single signed value to a single integer object. For an array, you're going to have to use a for loop. Something like this:
for i in DIN_ARRAY'range loop
DIN_ARRAY_int <= to_integer(DIN_ARRAY(i));
end loop;
You could also provide a conversion function (it will also contain a for loop)
function datastream_to_datastream_int( d : datastream ) return datastream_int is
variable r : datastream_int;
begin
for i in d'range loop
r(i) := to_integer(d(i));
end loop;
return r;
end function;
....
--no loop required
DIN_ARRAY_int <= datastream_to_datastream_int(DIN_ARRAY);
So, there will be a for loop somewhere.
Your code fails because you have attempted a type conversion, which is only allowed between similar types - ie. array or record types where the element types match between the two types.
PS. VHDL 2008 provides an integer_vector type in the std.standard library (which is included by default) which may help by allowing you to do this:
signal DIN_ARRAY_int: integer_vector(DIN_ARRAY'range);
If you did decide to keep datastream_int as per your original, you could type convert it to an integer_vector, because the types are similar:
my_iv <= integer_vector(DIN_ARRAY_int);
function check(str,arg;type=DataType,max=nothing,min=nothing,description="")
#argcheck typeof(arg)==type
#argcheck arg>min
#argcheck arg<max
#argcheck typeof(description)==String
return arg
end
function constr(name,arg,field)
return :(function $name($arg,$field)
new(check($name,$arg,$field))
end)
end
macro creatStruct(name,arg)
code = Base.remove_linenums!(quote
struct $name
end
end)
print(arg)
append!(code.args[1].args[3].args,[constr(name,arg.args[1].args[1],arg.args[1].args[2])])
code
end
macro myStruct(name,arg)
#creatStruct name arg
end
#myStruct test12 (
(arg1,(max=10))
)
In my code above I'm trying to build a macro that Creates a struct, and within the struct, you can define an argument with boundaries (max, min) and description, etc.
I'm getting this error:
syntax: "#141#max = 10" is not a valid function argument name
and every time I'm trying to solve it, I get another error like:
LoadError: syntax: "struct" expression not at top level
So, I think my Code/Approach is not that cohesive. Anybody can suggest tips and/or another Approche.
You're attempting to make an argument name max with a default value of 10. The error is about max=10 not being a valid name (Symbol), while max is. The bigger issue is you're trying to put this in the struct expression instead of a constructor method:
struct Foo
bar::Float64
max::Int64
end
# constructor
Foo(bar, max=10) = Foo(bar, max)
So you have to figure out how to make an expression for a method with default values, too.
Your second error means that structs must be defined in the top-level. "Top-level" is like global scope but stricter in some contexts; I don't know the exact difference, but it definitely excludes local scopes (macro, function, etc). It looks like the issue is the expression returned by creatStruct being evaluated as code in myStruct, but the LoadError I'm getting has a different message. In any case, the error goes away if I make sure things stay as expressions:
macro myStruct(name,arg)
:(#creatStruct $name $arg)
end
I need to make several detours to various functions and doing it one by one is just not an option. I'm looking for a function that will take a table, ideally, and this table is class. Loop through it and for each key, value pair that is a function make a function pointer with a prefix before the original function name. I have tried several variations to achieve this effect, but they all yield different problems. Some simply will not make detour pointer no matter what you give to them, others make detour pointers but they don't work, and some will overflow the stack or simply not be recognized.
I want to know if there is a way, ie rawsets, metatable overrides, constant looping until they do match, etc to make it so the function can get a table (or a string that has the same name as the table, thus a loadstring method would work here too) and loop through each function and make a working detour pointer...no matter what.
I prefer using the self:prefix_orig_name(...) syntax [... can be replaced with actual args].
Here's 2 variations I have tried with example useage.
-- 1st Method
detours = detours or {}
function detour(object, class) -- Class is an extra arg that I would send if for some reason just sending an object didn't work...it was theory oh'ed
if detours[object] then -- Check if the detour already exists...might be worth remaking it especially if the function gets overridden several times in different places?
print("detour: Previous " .. object .. " detour found, using previous detour")
return
end
for name, func in pairs(class and class or loadstring("return " .. object)()) do
-- the loadstring method here is used because the argument received is a string of the same name as the table...thus loading it will yield a table
if type(func) == "function" then
local execute, error = loadstring(object .. ".custom_detour_" .. name .. " = " .. object .. "." .. name) -- This makes the actual pointer
if error then
print("detour Error: " .. " Failed to detour: " .. object .. " Error: " .. error)
end
local luanch, assert = pcall(execute)
if not luanch then
print("detour Error: " .. " Failed to detour: " .. object .. " Error: " .. assert)
end
end
end
print("Table: " .. object .. " successfully detourd")
detours[object] = true -- tells us we made a detour of this table/string
end
-- 2nd Method
function detour(object) -- Takes a table
for k, v in pairs(object) do
if type(v) == "function" and not detours[k] then
if not object.custom_detour_ then
object.custom_detour_ = clone(object) -- use a simple cloning function (shallow) to put a clone of the main table into a sub table of the main table
end
if object["custom_detour_" .. k] ~= object.custom_detour_[k] then
object["custom_detour_" .. k] = object.custom_detour_[k] -- this makes it so the self:custom_detour_orig_name(...) syntax can be used, if I am not mistaken
end
end
end
end
-- Example Usage:
MyClass = class() -- class function is relatively OOP standard
function MyClass:init()
self._something = true
end
function MyClass:change(value)
self._something = value
end
function MyClass:table_print(tbl) -- just making funcs up
for k, v in pairs(tbl) do
print(v)
end
end
my_class = MyClass:new()
-- 1st Method
detour("MyClass")
--2nd Method
detour(MyClass)
I personally prefer the 1st method or at least a string, because I can log each detour and if a problem arises later on, it makes debugging easier...but I am for whatever will work.
Simple detouring is easy to do with closures; no need for loadstring:
function detour(cls)
local detours = {}
for key, value in pairs(cls) do
if type(value) == "function" then -- note: ignores objects with __call metamethod
detours["custom_detour_"..key] = function(...)
-- Do whatever you want here
return value(...)
end
end
end
for key, value in pairs(detours) do
cls[key] = value
end
end
In an IML proc I have several martices and several vectors with the names of columns:
proc IML;
mydata1 = {1 2 3, 2 3 4};
mydata2 = {1 2, 2 3};
names1 = {'red' 'green' 'blue'};
names2 = {'black' 'white'};
To assign column names to columns in matrices one can copypaste the mattrib statement enough times:
/* mattrib mydata1 colname=names1;*/
/* mattrib mydata2 colname=names2;*/
However, in my case the number of matrices is defined at execution, thus a do loop is needed. The following code
varNumb=2;
do idx=1 to varNumb;
call symputx ('mydataX', cat('mydata',idx));
call symputx ('namesX', cat('names',idx));
mattrib (symget('mydataX')) colname=(symget('namesX'));
end;
print (mydata1[,'red']) (mydata2[,'white']);
quit;
however produces the "Expecting a name" error on the first symget.
Similar question Loop over names in SAS-IML? offers the macro workaround with symget, what produces an error here.
What is the correct way of using mattrib with symget? Is there other way of making a variable from a string than macro?
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Alex
EDIT1
The problem is in the symget function. The &-sign resolves the name of the matrix contained in the macro variable, the symget only returns the name of the macro.
proc IML;
mydata1 = {1 2 3};
call symputx ('mydataX', 'mydata1');
mydataNew = (symget('mydataX'));
print (&mydataX);
print (symget("mydataX"));
print mydataNew;
quit;
results in
mydata1 :
1 2 3
mydata1
mydataNew :
mydata1
Any ideas?
EDIT2
Function value solves the symget problem in EDIT1
mydataNew = value(symget('mydataX'));
print (&mydataX);
print (value(symget("mydataX")));
print mydataNew;
The mattrib issue but persists.
SOLVED
Thanks Rick, you have opened my eyes to CALL EXECUTE() statement.
When you use CALL SYMPUTX, you should not use quotes for the second argument. Your statement
call symputx ('mydataX', 'mydata1');
assigns the string 'mydata1' to the macro variable.
In general, trying to use macro variables in SAS/IML loops often results in complicated code. See the article Macros and loops in the SAS/IML language for an indication of the issues caused by trying to combine a macro preprocessor with an interactive language. Because the MATTRIB statement expects a literal value for the matrix name, I recomend that you use CALL EXECUTE rather than macro substitution to execute the MATTRIB statement.
You are also having problems because a macro variable is always a scalar string, whereas the column name is a vector of strings. Use the ROWCAT function to concatenate the vector of names into a single string.
The following statements accomplish your objective without using macro variables:
/* Use CALL EXECUTE to set matrix attributes dynamically.
Requires that matrixName and varNames be defined at main scope */
start SetMattrib;
cmd = "mattrib " + matrixName + " colname={" + varNames + "};";
*print cmd; /* for debugging */
call execute(cmd);
finish;
varNumb=2;
do idx=1 to varNumb;
matrixName = cat('mydata',idx);
varNames = rowcat( value(cat('names',idx)) + " " );
run SetMattrib;
end;
I was trying to return type std_logic_vector by type conversion in vhdl.
Here is my code:
function mul(num1,num2 : in std_logic_vector(7 DOWNTO 0)) return std_logic_vector is
variable v_TEST_VARIABLE1 : integer;
variable v_TEST_VARIABLE2 : integer;
variable n_times: integer:=1;
variable product: integer:=0;
begin
for n_times in 1 to v_TEST_VARIABLE2 loop
product:=product + v_TEST_VARIABLE1;
end loop;
return std_logic_vector(product);
end mul;
It gives "Illegal type conversion from std.standard.integer to ieee.std_logic_1164.std_logic_vector (numeric to array)." on compilation.
How do I return std_logic_vector in such a code?
See Russell's post first. If you use the VHDL-2008, numeric_std_unsigned package, then you can use just one conversion:
use ieee.numeric_std_unsigned.all ;
...
return to_std_logic_vector(product, length) ; -- long form
-- alternate short form
return to_slv(product, length) ;
Usage warning: for synthesis, I consider VHDL-2008 items to be on the bleeding edge of support. Hence, while I use VHDL-2008 frequently in my testbenches, I try to limit the usage of it in my RTL code to what can't be done using other methods. However, if you ever want to use code like this, it is it is important to try it out in your synthesis tool and submit a bug report against it if it does not work - that is the only way change happens.
You must first convert it to an unsigned. I hope you're using numeric_std? If so, your code looks like this. Note that to use to_unsigned you must know the length of your output std_logic_vector. So this either needs to be an input to your function or you can bound the return vector:
return std_logic_vector(to_unsigned(product, length));
More information about how to convert std_logic_vector to integer.