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.
Related
as the title said, I am learning common lisp right now and using portacle, following Practical Common Lisp by Peter Seibel.
I found it quite annoying that the Slime-repl-sbcl buffer keep the writing at the end of the screen (using C-l or C-v doesn't help since once I try to execute an expression it will roll back to the end of the screen)
Is there anywhere to improve this? (should I just write on a text file and compile it? the only similar subject I found was about Cider repl and couldn't understand it, since I am still new to lisp)
Thank you for your time
I would like this fixed too. No solution yet. In slime-repl.el, I found:
scroll-conservatively (variable):
A value of zero means always recenter point if it moves off screen.
my test wasn't conclusive.
slime-display-output-buffer (function), which calls slime-repl-show-maximum-output, which role is to
Put the end of the buffer at the bottom of the window.
I rewrote slime-display-output-buffer without this call, but that wasn't conclusive either.
Maybe I tested badly.
(I'm making this answer a wiki)
You would indeed typically write in a source file, and compile each expression separately. Use the REPL only to test functions or do simple computations. To compile functions (or really, any toplevel expression), use C-c C-c - bound to slime-compile-defun by default - when the point (= your cursor) is inside the function's code. The REPL will then "know" of it, so you can test it there, but as it is now written in file, you can also modify it without having to copy/paste anything ! Just make sure to recompile functions that you modify !
If you want to compile/load entire files at once, look at the other compilation commands, e.g. slime-compile-and-load-file (see the SLIME manual, and its Compilation section)
For your problem: there is Emacs variable, named comint-scroll-to-bottom-on-input (or something along those lines, can't remember exactly ...) which enables the behaviour you are seeing, so that you don't have to scroll back to enter new expressions. It is possible that SLIME has another variable which configuring this behaviour for its REPL; in that case, it would probably be named almost the same, and you can set it to nil to disable it.
Finally, don't hesitate to look at the other tools provided by SLIME ! For example, it comes with an "inspector" (see the relevant section), that you can use instead of evaluating expressions such as *db* in the REPL. In that simple case, it makes no real difference, but if you start having - say - hash-tables or different structures/classes, it becomes an incredible tool for interactive development, to examine the internal of almost everything, redefine things directly from within the inspector without needing complex accessors, and so on.
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 am a newbie on Emacs. I was going to learn how to close a buffer, so I typed M-x apropos-documentation RET close buffer. Then I got a lot of useless information.
Given the above senario, what's the right way to find what I wanna know using the self-documenting system?
Or the self-documenting system is useless compared to Google in the modern day?
When you are just beginning with Emacs, the best documentation to start with is the tutorial. You can get there with C-h t. A half hour spent doing the tutorial will show you all the basics, including buffer management. This will save you a lot of time compared to searching for each command individually, either via Google or apropos.
Another benefit of the tutorial is that you'll get a quick overview of Emacs' idiosyncratic terminology. For example, the word 'kill' is used as a near-synonym for 'delete'. Searching for 'kill buffer' with apropos would likely have answered your question.
You are better off with Google until you know the terminology and maybe even after that. I've used the emacs documentation system a lot, but mainly for looking up something which I already knew about, or something for which I already knew the exact terminology.
If you are unsure how to search for something in the documentation then Google is much more effective, because it also takes synoyms into account and it finds questions similar to yours from forums and stuff. It does not only apply to Emacs, but to any other software as well. Regardless of the software I always try a Google search first, because in most cases Google throws out the answer much more quickly than browsing the documentation,
So a basic terminology problem tripped you up here. I would say that Emacs doesn't help here by not catering for this case in the glossary, and naming the relevant menu item "Close" and binding it to a different function to the C-xk sequence (which would be to avoid prompting you again). I note that the tooltip for that menu item does at least indicate the "kill" terminology, however, which certainly would have assisted your search.
That mismatch was always going to cause problems for searching with apropos, but the self-documentation in Emacs goes beyond that. Really, the tutorial or user manual should have been your next step. (The tutorial should be your first step, in fact.)
Any of the following would have found you the answer fairly quickly, even without knowing the "kill" term.
Go through the tutorial: C-ht
Look for "buffer" in the manual's contents page: C-hr
Search the manual's index C-hrI buffers RET
(admittedly searching for buffer (singular) provides more cluttered results)
Search the keybindings: C-hbM-x occur RET buffer RET
(occur is a bit more advanced, but C-s would work too)
C-hk click the "File" -> "Close" menu item
(which is not the same binding as C-xk as commented on above; but this would also have shown the "kill" terminology)
I think it's a bit of a shame that the accepted answer for a question entitled "How to effectively use the self-documenting system of Emacs?" is one which steers you away from those systems, as once you know your way around them you'll rarely need anything other than Emacs' own documentation.
First of all, just because you did not understand the information, it does not mean that it is useless.
Second of all, once you have even the slightest idea what commands are called, you can do M-x, and tab-expand the command. Once you've invoked it, emacs will also flash up a message telling you the key binding for that command if there is one.
I wrote an extensive tutorial on learning Emacs via its built-in help and elisp source code: http://david.rothlis.net/emacs/howtolearn.html
Several people have found it very useful.
The self-documenting nature of Emacs is amazing (once you learn your way around).
Also
emacs-index-search
elisp-index-search
Get aquainted with th C-h chords [1]:
C-h a command-apropos What commands work like this...?
C-h c describe-key-briefly What command does this key sequence do?
C-h b describe-bindings What are the key bindings for this buffer?
C-h k describe-key What command does this sequence do?
C-h l view-lossage What are the last 100 characters typed?
C-h w where-is What is the key binding for this?
C-h f describe-function What does this function do?
C-h v describe-variable What is this variable?
C-h o describe-symbol What is this symbol? (function, variable or face)
C-h m describe-mode Tell me about this mode.
C-h s describe-syntax What is the syntax table for this buffer?
Although they wouldn't have helped with the particular query you were after, they come in handy very often. As for apropos, give up. Use Google and the Emacs Wiki instead.
I'm an experienced C++/.NET/Java Windows/web programmer trying to learn (Common) Lisp. I'm reading Practical Common Lisp and using SLIME.
I'm getting the Lisp language easily enough, but I'm having trouble groking the mechanics of development. One of my issues is dealing with Emacs. I have no experience with it and find it generally confusing with hard to find/figure out commands.
Specific questions:
I get the REPL, but I don't quite get how I can use it effectively. When I need to change a function I have to retype the defun and make changes (tedious and error prone). How can I do this better?
How do I get from entering code at the REPL to actually having a program? I'm used to the C model where you have code files that you can review, edit and recompile. I know Lisp has something similar (via the load function), but how does one get a function I just defined and tested into a file to be saved? I'm hoping there's a better method than my current select+copy+paste.
How do you debug errors? Is there any ability to step into code like I would with other languages?
As long as the S-expression is valid, I don't get any errors when entering a (defun ...). It's not until I try to use it that I find out it's not valid. Is there any way to get errors sooner (i.e. compile the code)?
Is there some IDE that would be more familiar to me or allow me to play with the language easier?
Should I switch to learning Scheme instead?
Any tips would be greatly appreciated!
-I get the REPL, but don't quite get how I can use it effectively. When I
need to change a function I have to
retype the defun and make changes
(tedious and error prone). How can I
do this better?
-How do I get from entering code at the REPL to actually having a program?
I'm used to the C model where you have
code files that you can review, edit
and recompile. I know lisp has
something similar (via the load
function), but how does one get a
function I just defined and tested
into a file to be saved? I'm hoping
there's a better method than my
current select+copy+paste.
Load SLIME. Enter code in your .lisp file, and then run slime-eval-buffer to load all your code into Lisp. Then, for a specific function you are hacking on C-e, C-j to redefine it in your running Lisp.
-How do you debug errors? Is there any ability to step into code like I would with other languages?
Yes. (trace 'my-function) - or some variant on that - and when my-function is called, it will break into the debugger.
-As long as the S-expression is valid, I don't get any errors when entering a
(defun ...). It's not until I try to
use it that I find out it's not valid.
Is there any way to get errors sooner
(i.e. compile the code)?
To some degree, that is a characteristic of dynamic languages (Python, Perl, Ruby, Lisp, etc.). Try SBCL for better error-checking.
-Is there some IDE that would be more familiar to me or allow me to play with the language easier?
Emacs is the free IDE for Lisp. Allegro has a free edition I believe; I've never tried it though..
-Should I switch to learning Scheme instead?
Nah, Scheme is not as pragmatic a language.
I'm an experienced C++/.NET/Java Windows/Web programmer trying to learn (Common) Lisp. I'm reading Practical Common Lisp and using SLIME.
One can also use the LispWorks Personal Edition for learning Lisp. It has some limitations and the full product is commercial, but it is quite a bit easier to use.
I get the REPL, but don't quite get how I can use it effectively. When I need to change a function I have to retype the defun and make changes (tedious and error prone). How can I do this better?
The REPL has a history. With keyboard commands you can get back prior input and change it. Other than that just edit a Lisp file and compile code from there. In Lisp you can compile/eval individual expressions and definitions. Typical IDEs like SLIME, LispWorks or Allegro CL allow you to run code also from normal Lisp text windows - additionally to executing expressions in the REPLA (aka Listener).
How do I get from entering code at the REPL to actually having a program? I'm used to the C model where you have code files that you can review, edit and recompile. I know Lisp has something similar (via the load function), but how does one get a function I just defined and tested into a file to be saved? I'm hoping there's a better method than my current select+copy+paste.
Copy and paste in one thing. But the correct way is to work from a text file in an editor window. One can compile/load expressions, the editor buffer or the associated file.
How do you debug errors? Is there any ability to step into code like I would with other languages?
See STEP, TRACE and related. SLIME, LispWorks and Allegro CL have lots of additional features.
As long as the S-expression is valid, I don't get any errors when entering a (defun ...). It's not until I try to use it that I find out it's not valid. Is there any way to get errors sooner (i.e. compile the code)?
For many cases one uses a compiler. The compiler will find a range of errors and also will note when something is unusual (for example a function does not exist or a variable has not been defined).
-Is there some IDE that would be more familiar to me or allow me to play with the language easier?
LispWorks, Allegro CL are the best under Windows. There are some alternatives like Corman Lisp (I don't know it is maintained right now) or even Ufasoft Lisp.
Should I switch to learning Scheme instead?
Not really.
It doesn't sound like you're really using SLIME, or at least not in the way it was intended to be used. ("have to retype the defun", "the C model where you have code files")
I recommend watching some SLIME screencasts (or, even better, watching a Lisp programmer use SLIME for a few minutes, if you have one handy). The SLIME webpage has a couple.
It sounds like you'd really enjoy the DrRacket IDE. Racket is closer to Scheme than to Common Lisp, but you could dip your toes into the Lisp family without the speed bump of the Emacs style of development.
I am not a very good at using Emacs, but the feature I would like the most would be some integration with help/documentation for a particular language/API I use at the moment. I would imagine that there would be help displayed in another buffer depending on where I put my cursor while editing.
I wonder if there is a package that does that, even if it would be very simple, just displaying some file based on the keyword. I think there is, but I cannot find it ("help" is a too generic word).
(In particular, I would like to have this help for Common Lisp, but other languages, such as Java or C, could be useful.)
ILISP and SLIME provide several methods for looking up a function; see the Emacs wiki and the SLIME documentation. Or just built into Emacs itself, there are functions like C-h f to get function help or M-x man; both use the text at the point by default. You could pretty easily adapt them to work for another language of your choice.
Assuming you are using SLIME for common-lisp, you can take a look at slime-autodoc-mode.
Sorry, can't help with a generic solution for this.
You can set up the CLHS root for SLIME in your .emacs file:
(setq common-lisp-hyperspec-root "/usr/share/doc/hyperspec/HyperSpec/")
Adjust the path to where you put your HyperSpec.
Then, C-c C-d h with point at a symbol will look it up there in your browser.
One thing you might like to enable is eldoc-mode, by adding (turn-on-eldoc-mode) to your mode hook functions for the appropriate programming modes.
In ElDoc mode, the echo area displays information about a
function or variable in the text where point is. If point is
on a documented variable, it displays the first line of that
variable's doc string. Otherwise it displays the argument list
of the function called in the expression point is on.
This is probably less than you were after, but it still makes a good companion to a fuller-featured contextual help system, and there are a number of programming modes that support it.