Tab-completion of a path in IPython 6.1.0 (on Ubuntu 16.04) proposes many non-relevant options (actual paths are at the end of the list).
Am I missing something ?
This is dues to historical baggage of IPython, it is on the process of being fixed. Initially IPython used to use readline to get user input, unfortunately readline define its own delimiter, and / is one of them. Thus IPython would only "see" the part after the last slash. So in your case, IPython does not see you are in a string, and thus think you may be in a division, where abs() and other make sens. This is on the wishlist of features to improve, and contributions to this are welcome.
Technically, even with partial inputs like the example above, as IPython uses jedi it may be a matter of asking jedi wether the cursor is in a string, and skip some completer providers. If you want to attempt a fix, I'm pretty sure the IPython developers will be happy to guide you.
Related
I want to have 2 versions of Gensim for using summarization and keyword function from old Gensim.
How can I setup this senario?
In general, a single Jupyter notebook is backed by a single Python interpreter/environment, and popular packages at their 'official' installation paths can only be installed once.
There are a few hackish workarounds suggested in answers like:
Installing multiple versions of a package with pip
However, each workaround presents operational problems.
One approach is to install the older package to a non-standard path (directory) that's still found by Python importing logic (controlled by PYTHONPATH). For example, put/move the older copy of Gensim to a gensim_old package directory. But: this is only likely to work well with very sime (single-.py-file) packages.
With any signficant library (like Gensim) which cross-imports a lot of things from its own utility modules, using the standard paths, lots of things are likely to break unless you dig into all involved individual files to change their import paths. That's kind of kludgey & hard-to-maintain. (Though, to the extent you're just using one old version, say gensim-3.8.3 for the removed summarization feature, perhaps it'd be worth fighting through this process once, then keeping the changes around.)
Another approach is to create a totally-separate Python environment with the alternate version, and only use that other environment from the notebook by a system-call – via either something in Python-code like subprocess.call(), or the notebook-cell ! or !! magic-escapes to run a shell command. That is, you give up the ability to run individual interactive lines of Python in that alt environment - but could still send it batches of data, and either capture the console output or observe its output files to continue processing in your notebook.
I'd expect this to be a better option – cleaner & more-maintainable – provided that either the old-version-functionality (summarization) or new-version-functionality (whatever else) can be condensed into one (or a few) single-step scripts.
Another option would be to try to completely copy the gensim.summarization source code files to some new location inside your own project – performing whatever (few, minor) edits are necessary to ensure it works from the alternate location.
One of the reasons that functionality was removed was that its approach to things like tokenization was not consistent/integrated with other Gensim practices – which actually means it's likely to be a little easier to keep it working (given its use of its own idiosyncratic approaches) separately.
Personally I'd rank these three options desirability as:
(best) Section off the summarization tasks to be run via subprocess executions in a separate Python environment, which has only the older package installed.
(maybe ok) Copy the 10 .py files that implement the gensim.summarization' to your own local module. Edit lightly as necessary to ensure they still work. (That should mainly be updating import` lines, but might reuire a few other adaptations to other Python 3.x/Gensim 4.x changes.)
(probably too messy) Install the whole old package to a non-standard directory, edit lots of files to ensure anything you're using still works.
Finally, note that the main reason the feature was removed is that it did not offer very impressive or adaptable results. While I've seen some people say it's worked OK for their applications, I've never seen even so much as a demo where its practices/algorithm – which can only extract some subset of important sentences, never paraphrase – gave impressive results.
So unless you already know that its approach works well for your needs, don't get your hopes up! Good luck.
I am using emacs 23 on two computers.
On both, dpkg -s emacs outputs the following version number.
However one has window.el and the other not. This make some function such as split-window behave differently. The help page of this function on the computer that apparently has not window.el installed reads that it comes from C source code instead.
Where does this difference comes from?
I prefer the behaviour of the one that says that split-window comes from window.el: it allows to specify the SIDE when splitting window and provide additional function such as window-resize.
I suppose this is the most recent one but I do not know how to check it nor how to upgrade the other to this state.
Library window.el is as old as the hills. Perhaps you meant that one of your Emacs installlations has window.elc but not window.el?
More likely, you are referring only to function split-window. Yes, it used to be a built-in function (i.e., defined in C), and now it is defined in window.el (which file exists also for the older Emacs versions where that function is a built-in).
FYI, lots of window and buffer-display stuff was changed around the same time as split-window was rewritten in Lisp. Lots of behaviors changed, in minor or major ways.
What is not at all clear is what the problem is that you are reporting. You ask, "Where does this difference comes from? How to fix it?" I've explained a bit about the difference. As for how to fix it -- what is the "it" that needs fixing, and what would the fixed behavior be like?
IOW, your question is, so far, unanswerable. If you specify things more exactly, perhaps we can help more.
I'm not certain what's going on with your debian packages, but if memory serves the readable .el(.gz) files are not supplied in the basic package, but in a separate package. This is because all you strictly need is the byte-compiled .elc files, so they can reduce the base package filesize by omitting them (at the expense of enabling you to read the elisp code).
Is M-x load-library RET window RET successful?
Note that Emacs 24 is the current stable version. You might want to upgrade.
Edit:
M-x emacs-version tells you which version of Emacs you're running, which will always give you a definitive answer.
(And if the versions are identical, then run emacs -Q to eliminate and site- and user-specific config files from the picture, as those are always a likely culprit for differing behaviours.)
I usually have an environment setting for MAKE_MODE (Windows XP, using GNU make, both under Cygwin and native)
set MAKE_MODE=UNIX
I now found differences between my build server (which has no MAKE_MODE defined) and a local build. This may be something completely different, but it got me wondering what other values I could specify for MAKE_MODE.
I think I know that MAKE_MODE=UNIX is suppose to tell GNU make to use /bin/sh - if it finds it - , but I quickly checked the GNU make manual and couldn't find a description. A google search only told me what I already know, but doesn't give a valid alternative.
Is the only alternative to not define the variable? Does it have influence at all when using CMD.exe and a native version of GNU make?
EDIT: So far I have found references for the values 'unix', 'win32', 'null' and undefined, but no explanations, and no specifications. But a look at the source code for GNU make 3.82 shows not a single occurrence of the string "MAKE_MODE", so GNUmake itself apparently doesn't change its behavior when this environment variable is set or not.
EDIT2: I checked the source code for GNU make for MinGW, and again found nothing. Maybe it's CygWin specific?
EDIT3: I found a reference that it might be property of an old version of GNU make, so I checked version 3.75. No luck, the string MAKE_MODE does not appear in the source code at all. The next step really must be the Cygwin version of GNU make. I know from 10 years ago that the Cygwin port in those days was not integrated in the regular source tree.
I found an ancient mailing list entry on the Cygwin site, explaining the basic operational effect of MAKE_MODE. This definitely indicates that the variable has to do with the Cygwin implementation of GNU make.
I'll dig around in the source code, and add to this answer when I find more details.
UPDATE: In a more recent post by maintainer Christopher Faylor I found the following update for GNU make version 3.81:
Note that the --win32 command line option and "MAKE_MODE" environment
variable are no longer supported in Cygwin's make. If you need to use a
Makefile which contains MS-DOS path names, then please use a MinGW
version of make.
I've not really found the values allowed for MAKE_MODE, but it's not any more necessary or supported in most recent versions of GNU make for Cygwin, and it was used for supporting DOS filenames in Cygwin's make.
And if you really want to know the set of allowed values, look in the source for Cygwin's make version before 3.81-1. I guess the only useful value was unix, all others will have meant the same.
Case closed? There's still not many views here...
I am using Eclipse 3.6.1 Build id: M20100909-0800 and Aptana Studio 2.0.5 which is based on Eclipse 3.5.2 (both on OS X) and in both programs the external tools feature seems to swallow double quotes and whitespace for the ${selected_text} variable.
Isn't the ${selected_text} variable essentially useless with the mentioned behaviour?
Is there a way around that or maybe a hidden setting somewhere?
Thanks for reading.
This could easily be considered a safety/security feature.
I suggest "${selected_text}".
...but if it's eating ALL whitespace, that won't really help. Huh. Maybe it's clever enough to detect the quotes and preserve the whitespace... but probably not.
Okay, I did a little poking around. Quotes within the argument list itself are preserved, as per my initial suggestion above. I found the following auto-generated argument list that was working Just Fine:
-os ${target.os} -ws ${target.ws} -arch ${target.arch} -nl ${target.nl} -consoleLog
-debug "${workspace_loc:/com.cardiff.bpm.ide.webforms.ui/debug.options}"
But if your text selection contains quotes, I'd expect it to be handled as per the underlying OS. Windows "cmd" does some... creative things with them for example. My *nix-fu is Not Mighty, so I couldn't tell you what OS X will do under the covers, but I suspect that's where you'll find your solution.
You may have to do something goofy like URL-encode your selection, and use some command line tool to un-encode it before passing it to your desired external tool once the text is out of Eclipse's clutches.
A (very) quick look around my 3.6.1 UI didn't turn up that would do this automagically for you, but there's probably a plugin out there somewhere that'll add that feature to an editor's context (right click) menu.
I'd expect the HTML editor to have this ability already... but I don't see anything other than "smart insert mode" that sounds promising, and I don't see that working either.
That doth bloweth goats, most heartily, yay for weeks on end. E'en till yon goat hath a rash, most unpleasant in both severity and locality. Verily.
I don't think you're getting my proposed solution:
Set up your tool so it'll de-url-encode-ificate the incoming string with some proposed command line tool.
In your editor (in eclipse), URL-encode the text you wish to select and pass to the tool. Manually.
Run the tool on the selected (url-encoded) text.
Revert the selected text. Also manually. Probably just "undo".
"1" is why I was looking for some eclipse UI way of url-encoding a selection. The HTML Editor won't even do it when you paste into an attribute string. Sheesh.
Two Other Options:
Fix the bug yourself. Open Source and all that.
Write a plugin that exposes it's own version of ${selected_text} that doesn't strip out all the strings.
Hey! SED! Replace the quotes with some random (unused in any selection you might make) high-ascii character and sed it back to a double quote instead of the proposed de-url-encode-ificationizer. You'd still have to manually edit/undo the text, but at least you won't have to """ Actually search/replace over a given selection makes that less painful than one might think.
I'm not sure what the scope of #2 is, but I'd image if you don't have any eclipse plugin experience the thought might be rather daunting. There might even be a sample plugin that exposes such a variable, though I haven't checked.
I don't think we're communicating.
You don't select text with quotes in it. You select mangled text, and sed demangles it back into quotes for you.
For example, you have the string print("hello world"); in your editor and want to send that to your tool.
change it to print(~hello world~); in your editor. Manually or via a script or whatever.
select it
run your tool, maybe wrapped in a script that'll sed the ~s back to "s.
change it back to print("hello world");.
This is a manual process. It's not pretty. Bug workarounds are like that. You can probably come up with a monkey script to convert quotes to Something Else, and "undo" is easy. You might even be able to get your script attached to a keyboard short cut... dunno. And ~ is a lousy choice for a replacement character, it's just the first thing I could think of that was rare enough to be a decent example.
Are we communicating yet?
For the record, I put together a patch using some guidance from a gentleman in the bug comments.
I don't know if it will be accepted, but it fixes things for me so maybe someone else may find it useful.
Again, this is only for Mac OS X Eclipse.
Start Eclipse.
Go to Import > Plug-ins and Fragments.
Import From: Active Platform
Fragments to import: Select from all plug-ins
Import As: Projects from a repository
Next >
Pick org.eclipse.debug.ui and org.eclipse.debug.core
Once the projects are in your workspace, apply the two patches that compose proposed patch v1, found at the bug tracker page for bug 255619
Go to Export > Deployable plug-ins and fragments and make a jar out of your changed packages.
Hope it helps.
What patterns contribute or detract from the usability of a CLI interface?
As an example consider the CLI for ClearCase. The CLI is very comprehensive (+1) but it is has several glaring opportunities. Recently, I wanted to force the files to lower case into ClearCase using clearfsimport. Unfortunately I wound up on the documentation for its cousin clearimport. It may seem slight but it cost me more hours than I care to admit. The variation in the middle got me.
Why provide such nearly identical functionality with such nearly identical names? There are many better options in my opinion
clearimport -fs
fsclearimport
clear_fs_import
clearimport_fs
Anything would be better than what they went with. The code I am working on IS a CLI and this experience made me look at my own choices. I think I have all the basics covered (standard help, long-form vs short-form, short meaningful names, providing examples, eliminate ambiguity, accurately handling spaces within quotes, etc).
There is some literature on this subject.
Perhaps a bad CLI is no different than a bad API. CLI are type of an API in some sense. The goals are naturally common:: flexibility, readability, and completeness. Several factors differentiate CLI from a typical API. One is that CLI needs to support scriptability (participate many times perhaps in a series of pipes). Another is that autocompletion and namespaces don't exist in the same way. You don't always have a nice colorful GUI doing stuff for you. CLIs must document themselves externally to customer directly. And finally the audience of a CLI is vastly different than the standard API. I appreciate any insight you may have.
I like the subcommand pattern, which I'm most familiar with as its implemented in the command-line Subversion client.
svn [subcommand] [options] [files]
Without the subcommands, subversion would have waaaaay too many different options for me to remember them effectively, and the help system would be a pain to slog through.
But, if I don't remember how any particular subcommand works, I can just type:
svn help [subcommand]
...and it shows me only the relevant portions of the help documentation.
As noted above, this format:
[master verb] [subverb] [optionally, noun] [options]
is good in terms of remembering what commands are available. cvs, svn, Perforce, git, all adhere to this. It improves discoverability of commands, a major CLI problem. One wrinkle that occurs here is options for the master-verb vs. options for the subverb. I.e.,
cvs -d dir command bar
is different than
cvs command -d dir bar
This was a confusing situation in cvs, which svn "fixed" by allowing options specified in any order. Your own solution may vary; if you have a very good reason to pass options to the master verb, okay, just be aware of the overhead.
Looking to API usability is a good idea too, but beware that there is no real typing in CLI commands, and there is a lot of richness in what CLI commands 'return', since you've got both a return code and an output to work with. In the unixy/streams world, the output is usually much more important than the return code. Getting the format of your output right is crucial. Also, while tempting, I've found that sending different things to stdout vs. stderr is not always useful; it confuses novice and even intermediate users (because they both get dumped to console in most cases), and rarely is useful advanced users. So unless there's a real need for it I avoid it; it's too easy for (e.g.) someone to get very confused about why the output of a command was '' in an error condition just because the programmer nicely dumped the errors to stderr.
Another issue in design is the "what next" problem. In a GUI, the next steps for the user are spelled out by the available buttons, menus, etc. In a CLI, the user can literally type any command next, and pipe any command to any other. (Or try, at least.) I design my commands to give hints (either in the help or the output) as to what potential next steps might be in a typical workflow.
Another good pattern is allowing user customization of the output. While it is possible for users to use cut, sort, etc. to tailor the output, being able to specify a format string magnifies the utility of a command. The example I cite here is top, which lets you tell it which columns you want.