When I type 'f' in a C source file, my emacs with semantic installed and working
will show 25 completion matches, for functions like fclose, fread, and so on (only stdio.h
included)... but not fopen! Why?
Plus, same problem with opendir and readdir, with sys/types.h and dirent.h included.
P.S. semantic has all my sympathy, as upon my personal reading glibc header files showed
as a horrible mess of #ifnded and alikes.
'fopen' is turning up fine for me. Are you by any chance working on OS X? I remember that there were some preprocessor macros there which confused Semantic. Otherwise, your best chance for help is posting to the CEDET-devel mailing list, stating the CEDET version you're using and posting the exact definition of the 'fopen' function which apparently cannot be parsed.
Related
I work on computational music. I have found the ps13 pitch spelling algorithm implemented in Lisp in 2003, precisely "Digitool MCL 4.3". I would like to run this code, preferably on a Linux x86 machine, to compare its results with other similar codes.
I am new to Lisp, but so far my research led me to think that Digitool MCL is no longer available. I thought of two ways which may help me:
a virtual environment (Docker or else) which would emulate a machine from 2003…
a code translation tool which would transform the 2003 source code into something executable today
I have not succeeded in finding one of these two options, nor running it directly with sbcl (but, as a newbie, I may have missed a small modification to make it run easily).
May someone help me?
Summary
This code is very close to being portable CL: you won't need something emulating an antique Mac to run it. I ran it on three implementations (SBCL, LispWorks, CCL) within a few minutes. However if you're not a Lisp person (and don't want to become one) it will be somewhat more fiddly to do that.
However I can't just send you a fixed version, both because this isn't the right forum for that, and also because we'd need to get the author's permission to do so. I have asked him if he would be interested in a portabalised version, and if he is, I will send him one in due course. You could also get in touch and ask to be notified.
(Meta-summary: while I think the question is fine, any reasonable answer probably doesn't fit on SO.)
Details
One initial problem with this code is that the file uses old Mac line end conventions (I think: not Unix anyway): unless whatever Lisp you're using is smart enough to spot this (some are, SBCL seems not to be although I am sure there are options to tell it) you'll need to convert it.
Given that, the code that implements this algorithm is very, very close to being portable Common Lisp. It has four dependencies on non-standard things:
two global variables, *save-local-symbols* and *verbose-eval-selection*;
two functions: choose-file-dialog and choose-directory-dialog.
The global variables can probably be safely commented out as I think they are just controls for the compiler, probably. The functions have fairly obvious specifications: they're obviously meant to pop up file / directory choosers.
However you can just not use the bits of the code that use these functions, so you can compile it, get a few compiler warnings about undefined functions, and then it's fine.
But it gets better than that in fact: the latter-day descendant of MCL is Clozure CL: CCL is free, and open source. CCL has both choose-file-dialog and choose-directory-dialog already and both of the globals exist although one is no longer exported.
Unfortunately there are then some hidden portability problems to do with assumptions about what pathnames look like as strings: it's making some assumption about what things looked like on pre-OSX Macs I think. This kind of problem is easy but often a bit fiddly to fix (I think in this case it would be easy). So, again, the answer to that is just not call the things that are doing a lot of pathname munging:
> (ps13-test-from-file-list (directory "~/Downloads/d/*.opnd"))
[... much output ...]
Total number of errors = 81.
Total number of notes = 41544.
Percentage correct = 99.81%
nil
Note that the above output came from LispWorks, not CCL: CCL works just as well though, as will any CL probably.
SBCL has one additional problem: the CL-USER package in SBCL already uses a package which exports int which is defined in this code. So you need to compile it in some other package. But given that, it's fine in SBCL as well.
I use Merlin with Emacs to edit OCaml code. It normally works perfectly fine, but I wound the following problem:
I'm need to use a package, built by someone else, that adds to OCaml some keywords not native to the language. Since I use the package to compile the code, compilation works great. On the other hand Merlin goes crazy and thinks that the new keywords are an error. Luckily the new keywords only appear at the beginning of a line, so my code looks something like this:
let square x = x * x;;
let rec fact x =
if x <= 1 then 1 else x * fact (x - 1);;
FOO "This syntax is not standard Ocaml" square fact;;
Where FOO is the new keyword. Merlin will complain and say Unbound constructor FOO. So the question is, can I make Marlin ignore that line? OR can you think of a hack to wrap the syntax in something Merlin won't complain about?
Merlin doesn't and will not (afaik) support arbitrary syntax extensions, but they do have parsing hacks for most commonly used camlp4 extensions like pa_lwt, pa_macro, etc. Also newest merlin versions will skip unknown lines and recover parsing, so that 'go-to-definition' and type throwback work on other parts of the file not modified by syntax extensions.
An alternative, although quite different, but that offers a subset of the functionalities of Merlin (completion and documentation from libraries, navigating around files), is ocp-index.
Ocp-index doesn't interpret or type your current file (it only scans it for opens and the like), so it won't be troubled by arbitrary extensions.
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.)
It seems this forum is more alive than mailing list : http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=cedet-semantic.
I would like repost my quest from a week ago from there:
First hi to all who contribute to this great package as CEDET :D .
Without much hussle I am able to get working most of the CEDET futures, but when it comes to senator / semantic things get more tought :\ .
Parsing local files are fine.
I don't use EDE not to get things more complicated.
I use the 1.0.6 git trunk version, for compability with ECB.
First is the rumble about the emacs core / cedet git-trunk hussle. How do I check that current installation is running the latter ? ( I have done some .emacs modificaitons see below) .
I generally cannot get the proper autocomplete working for external libs - in this case the OGRE3D project, which all are in the /usr/include/OGRE. I suppose I have added to 'search path' include properly, semantic-describe-c-env. sees them added properly.
2.a What are the basic commands to the semantic parser ? , that is I need to force it to parse the desired includes.
Once I saw semantic parsing the OGRE files in the 'idle time'. Still the autocomplete does not work ( OGRE:RAY is not recongized as a type).
senator-completition-menu-pop gives some non-matching 'c**p'
2.b I know there are customize-group options for semantic, tough their description say little to me.
From the other post:
"Yes, there is a setup cost. You can use semanticdb.sh to pre-parse your
code, but if you never open every file, you might end up with Emacs
having such a huge data structure it gets larger that your machine can
handle. If your project is small, this shouldn't be a problem."
Well this might be, if that would parse OGRE.
here's my .emacs:
.emacs at pastebin.com
Here's what I got on the mailing list, hope that it would help someone , thaks to Eric Ludlam :D :
======================
1. First is the rumble about the emacs core / cedet git-trunk hussle. How do I check that current installation is running the latter ? ( I have done some .emacs modificaitons see below) .
After emacs start, use:
M-x cedet-version RET
and look for the 1.1 version from CEDET/bzr.
I just tried this and noticed not everything has the right version
number. Interesting. I'll have to look into that.
Anyway, the next thing to try is:
M-x locate-library RET cedet RET
and make sure it points where you think it should.
2. I generally cannot get the proper autocomplete working for external libs - in this case the OGRE3D project, which all are in the /usr/include/OGRE. I suppose I have added to 'search path' include properly, semantic-describe-c-env. sees them added properly.
If you enable global-semantic-decoration-mode you can right-click on
header files, and it will give you some options, such as showing where
it things the header is, and showing if it has been parsed yet or not.
2.a What are the basic commands to the semantic parser ? , that is I need to force it to parse the desired includes.
You can use the include menu to force a header to be parsed, or visit
said include. If it can't find it, you can add OGRE to your path from
there too.
If you vist your header, you can use the senator menu to force a file to
reparse, or use:
C-u M-x bovinate RET
to do it.
Once I saw semantic parsing the OGRE files in the 'idle time'. Still the autocomplete does not work ( OGRE:RAY is not recongized as a type). senator-completition-menu-pop gives some non-matching 'c**p'
Autocomplete can fail for many reasons. The best way to find out why is:
M-x semantic-analyze-debug-assist RET
at a place you want to do completion. It will tell you about your
header files, symbols, and the like. It could be your preprocessor
symbols need some setup.
For large complex library headers, sometimes it is just a matter of
having the right pre-processor symbols setup in Semantic so that the
right bits of the headers get parsed for symbols. You'd have to visit a
header where a symbol you want to complete is, and see if it was parsed.
Using:
M-x boviante RET
will dump the symbol table.
2.b I know there are customize-group options for semantic, tough their description say little to me.
From the other post:
"Yes, there is a setup cost. You can use semanticdb.sh to pre-parse your code, but if you never open *every* file, you might end up with Emacs having such a huge data structure it gets larger that your machine can handle. If your project is small, this shouldn't be a problem." Well this might be, if that would parse OGRE.
I doubt parsing the includes is the problem here. I think there is just
something new in the ogre headers we'll have to deal with.
Eric
===================================
There's a small nuance that's been bugging me for a while, namely that I frequently type #inclued instead of #include. If it wasn't obvious, I program a lot of C and C++. That typo has wrecked countless builds and consumed time that would have been better spent drinking coffee or surfing stackoverflow. Surely emacs can be helpful and rectify my mistakes as I type (in cc-mode only, of course). But how?
Googling and searching stackoverflow didn't provide any answers.
You could use this in abbrev-mode: After you entered #inclued, do C-x a i g include RET, and from then on, every time you type #inclued, it will be changed to #include automatically. If you want that abbrev to be local to a mode, use C-x a i l instead of C-x a i g. Also, you can edit your abbrevs with M-x edit-abbrevs.
A nicier and more global solution than abbrevs (because you can't predict all the typos you'll make) is to use flymake (which comes with emacs distribution).
http://flymake.sourceforge.net/
Flymake checks your source code behind the scene while you're still typing your code into the buffer. It highlights what's wrong with your code (that is : what gcc tells is wrong).
Running gcc in the background does not use more CPU than your antivirus bloatware. Moreover, if you have 2 or more cores, gcc can take advantage of parallelization. It only checks the syntax, not compiling anything.
if you're interested in something a bit different, you could write all your little piece into snippets, using the YAsnippet package, then you could type something like #in, hit TAB, and it will expand into... whatever you want.
Sounds like flymake is exactly what your after. It runs a compiler in the background, and will hightlight errors, as you type.
I was going to suggest that this could be a slightly odd application for flyspell, but danlei's answer looks better.