I'm using MonoDevelop-Unity 5.9.6.
I have created a custom policy, which mostly works.
There's one problem which despite multiple attempts I haven't been able to fix.
"else if" clauses have a completely broken indentation, as shown here:
broken else if indentation
if ( Input.GetButton( "Left" ) )
{
_nextDir = Direction.Left;
}
else if ( Input.GetButton( "Right" ) )
{
_nextDir = Direction.Right;
}
else if ( Input.GetButton( "Up" ) )
{
_nextDir = Direction.Up;
}
else if ( Input.GetButton( "Down" ) )
{
_nextDir = Direction.Down;
}
else
{
;
}
return false;
What could be causing it?
I don't think anyone would ever want to indent this way, so I assume it's either a bug or some settings that don't go well together, and if it's the latter, I hope someone will be able to point me out in the right direction.
I guess MonoDevelop sees the else if statement as an if statement embedded in an else statement. So, if you have turned off the Align Embedded Statements option in your policy, you'll be getting some weird indentations. Just turn it back on and you'll have your code formatted the way you like it.
Related
I am using this to find customer name in text file. Names are each on a separate line. I need to find exact name. If searching for Nick specifically it should find Nick only but my code will say found even if only Nickolson is in te list.
On*:text:*!Customer*:#: {
if ($read(system\Customer.txt,$2)) {
.msg $chan $2 Customer found in list! | halt }
else { .msg $chan 4 $2 Customer not found in list. | halt }
}
You have to loop through every matching line and see if the line is an exact match
Something like this
On*:text:*!Custodsddmer*:#: {
var %nick
; loop over all lines that contains nick
while ($read(customer.txt, nw, *nick*, $calc($readn + 1))) {
; check if the line is an exact match
if ($v1 == nick) {
%nick = $v1
; stop the loop because a result is found
break;
}
}
if (%nick == $null) {
.msg $chan 4 $2 Customer not found in list.
}
else{
.msg $chan $2 Customer found in list!
}
You can find more here: https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/mirc/text_files#Iterating_Over_Matches
If you're looking for exact match in a new line separate list, then you can use the 'w' switch without using wildcard '*' character.
From mIRC documentation
$read(filename, [ntswrp], [matchtext], [N])
Scans the file info.txt for a line beginning with the word mirc and
returns the text following the match value. //echo $read(help.txt, w,
*help*)
Because we don't want the wildcard matching, but a exact match, we would use:
$read(customers.txt, w, Nick)
Complete Code:
ON *:TEXT:!Customer *:#: {
var %foundInTheList = $read(system\Customer.txt, w, $2)
if (%foundInTheList) {
.msg # $2 Customer found in list!
}
else {
.msg 4 # $2 Customer not found in list.
}
}
Few remarks on Original code
Halting
halt should only use when you forcibly want to stop any future processing to take place. In most cases, you can avoid it, by writing you code flow in a way it will behave like that without explicitly using halting.
It will also resolve new problems that may arise, in case you will want to add new code, but you will wonder why it isn't executing.. because of the darn now forgotten halt command.
This will also improve you debugging, in the case it will not make you wonder on another flow exit, without you knowing.
Readability
if (..) {
.... }
else { .. }
When considering many lines of codes inside the first { } it will make it hard to notice the else (or elseif) because mIRC remote parser will put on the same identification as the else line also the line above it, which contains the closing } code. You should almost always few extra code in case of readability, especially which it costs new nothing!, as i remember new lines are free of charge.
So be sure the to have the rule of thump of every command in a new line. (that includes the closing bracket)
Matching Text
On*:text:*!Customer*:#: {
The above code has critical problem, and bug.
Critical: Will not work, because on*:text contains no space between on and *:text
Bug: !Customer will match EVERYTHING-BEFORE!customerANDAFTER <NICK>, which is clearly not desired behavior. What you want is :!Customer *: will only match if the first word was !customer and you must enter at least another text, because I've used [SPACE]*.
$getId = $this->getRequest()->getParam('id'); // 1 is coming from url
$id_from_cart = 1;
if($getId != $id_from_cart) {
echo "unset session";
Zend_Session::namespaceUnset('cart');
} else {
echo "dont unset";
}
When I use $getId = 1 as a static value, its working fine but if I use $this->getRequest()->getParam('id') as its value which is also 1 then although it goes in else condition in both the cases but it unsets the session (code written in if condition). How is that possible, code to destroy session has been written in if condition. I have tried many things but couldn't reach anywhere. Any suggestion could be a great help. I have tried switch case, in_array and if else.
Try this
$getId = (int) $this->getRequest()->getParam('id');
The question I have is a bit abstract, but I'll attempt to be clear in my statement. (This is something of a "rubber duck effect" post, so I'll be thankful if just typing it out gets me somewhere. Replies, however, would be brilliant!)
I have old fortran code that I can't change (at least not yet) so I'm stuck with its awkward output.
I'm using perl to post-process poorly annotated ascii output files, which, as you might imagine, are a very specialized mixture of text and numbers. "Ah, the perfect perl objective," you say. Yes, it is. But what I've come up with is pretty terrible coding, I've recently concluded.
My question is about the generic structure that folks prefer to use to achieve such an objective. As I've said, I'm not happy with the one I've chosen.
Here's some pseudocode of the structure that I've arrived at:
flag1 = 0;
flag2 = 0;
while (<INPUT>) {
if (cond1) {
do something [like parse and set a header];
flag1 = 1;
} else {
next;
}
if (flag1 == 1 && cond2) {
do something else [like process a block of data];
} else {
next;
}
}
The objective of the above code is to be able to break the processing into blocks corresponding to the poorly partitioned ascii file -- there isn't much by way of "tags" in the file, so the conditions (cond1, cond2, etc.) are involved. The purpose of having the flags set is, among other reasons, to track the progress of the code through the file.
It occurs to me now that a better structure might be
while (<INPUT>) {
do stuff;
}
while (<INPUT>) {
do other stuff;
}
In any event, if my rambling inspires any thoughts I'd appreciate hearing them.
Thank you
Your original structure is perfectly fine. You're building a state machine, and doing it in a completely reasonable way that can't really be made any more idiomatic.
The only thing you can possibly do if you wish is to modularize the code a wee bit:
our %state = (last => 0, current => 0, next => 0);
our %extra_flags = ();
sub cond1($line) { return $next_state } # Returns 0 if cond==false
sub cond2($line) { return $next_state } # Returns 0 if cond==false
our %conditions = (
0 => \&cond1
1 => \&cond2 # flag1 is set
);
while (<INPUT>) {
my $state = $state->{current};
if ($state->{next} = $conditions{$state}->($_, $state)) {
$do_stuff{$state}->{$next_state}->($line);
$state->{last} = $state->{current};
$state->{current} = $state->{next};
next;
}
}
If the file does indeed lend itself to being processed in multiple loops, that would be a much clearer way to do it than emulating that with conditionals, IMO.
If not, even if there are just a few exceptions to code around, it's probably better to stick with the original approach you describe.
Hey so I am trying to make a simple 'dating website' however I'm struggling with CGI aspect :( Mainly I'm having trouble with forms(I think I'm not too sure what I'm struggling with).
I have this statement
print header, start_html("EngCupid"), h2("EngCupid"), start_form;
if (!param() || param("home")) {
show_welcome();
} elsif (param("browse")) {
browse_page();
} elsif (param("search")) {
search_users();
} elsif (param("username")) {
search_results();
} else {
print "fail";
}
print end_form, end_html;
exit 0;
To Handle the general navigation of the website. However, I'm struggling when it comes to submit buttons etc inside these functions. So my browse_page() function is
sub browse_page {
print h2("Browse Page");
print p;
if (param("next")) {
$hidden_variable = param("x") + 1;
}
param('x', $hidden_variable);
$hidden_variable = 0;
print hidden('x');
print submit("next", "Next");
print submit("home", "Home"), " ", submit("search", "Search Users");
}
Which is supposed to increment a variable that I need to use for further functions every time I press the next key. However, whenever I press the next key it just prints fail as in the form isn't being passed?
Do I need a new form inside each function I am printing? I tried it but it still didn't work. Just a little lost in forms in general.
I am not sure what you are trying to achieve. Maybe the problem is that the x is not being sent back from client to server, maybe you wanted
print hidden('x', param('x'));
Also, why do you set $hidden_variable to 0? After submitting, the script will run again, the old value of the variable will not be accessible anymore.
I've just encountered some very weird behavior that I really can't explain:
do {
my $qry = $self->getHTMLQuery(undef, $mech->content());
next if (!defined($qry));
push(
#prods,
map { 'http://www.XXXXYYYX.com'.$_->attr('href') }
$qry->query('div.prodInfo div.prodInfoBox a.prodLink.GridItemLink')
);
$qry->delete();
$TEST++;
last if ($TEST >= 10);
} while(eval { $mech->follow_link(class => 'jump next') });
print "WHILE ENDED\n";
The code above never prints "WHILE ENDED" even though it does seem to go out of the while loop when $TEST >= 10.
But the following code does print "WHILE ENDED":
do {
my $qry = $self->getHTMLQuery(undef, $mech->content());
next if (!defined($qry));
push(
#prods,
map { 'http://www.XXXXYYYX.com'.$_->attr('href') }
$qry->query('div.prodInfo div.prodInfoBox a.prodLink.GridItemLink')
);
$qry->delete();
$TEST++;
} while(eval { $mech->follow_link(class => 'jump next') } && $TEST <= 10);
print "WHILE ENDED\n";
In both tests, the initial value of $TEST is 0.
Is the behavior of last in do...while different than in for and while {...}?
A do block with a looping modifier doesn't count as a real loop as far as next, last, and redo are concerned. This is mentioned in perlsyn, where you'll find the tip Schwern mentioned about surrounding it with a bare block to make last work. But that won't work with next, because a bare block is only executed once, so next acts like last. To make next work, you can put the bare block inside the do, but then last will act like next.
If you need both next and last to work with a do ... while, the easiest way is to use an infinite loop with the real condition in a continue block. These 2 loops are equivalent, except that the second is a real loop, so it works with next & last:
do { ... } while condition;
while (1) { ... } continue { last unless condition };
From perldoc -f last:
"last" cannot be used to exit a block that returns a value such as
"eval {}", "sub {}" or "do {}"
TLP is right. The standard work around for this (I just hit it myself) is to wrap the do/while in a bare block which, counter-intuitively, does respect loop controls.
{ do {
last;
} while 1; }
The block outside will catch last. If you want to handle next you have to put the bloc inside.
do {{
next;
}} while 1;
The block inside will catch next.
Unfortunately you can't do both.