I use the atom-runner package, which runs scripts when I click alt+x:
Now, I also installed the gpp-compiler package, which runs c++ files when I click F5:
It is confusing to have two different key-bindings for running. I would like to use alt+x both for gpp-compiler and for atom-runner, based on the file: if it's a c/c++ file then run gpp-compiler, otherwise run atom-runner.
Is this possible?
You are in luck. I was doing something similar to this recently and thought that this could be done.
I've made an Atom package to do what you're looking for. You can find it at https://atom.io/packages/multi-hotkey. The default hotkey is Ctrl-M.
Currently only one hotkey is possible, but with customization available for four different user-inputted file extensions and corresponding commands, and a final command for anything not matching the preceding extensions.
Related
My goal is to be able to reasonably debug any R-based code, even code from libraries (from install.packages, by placing breakpoints or debug statements (i.e., browser) at any line. I haven't been able to figure out how to reliably edit the source of any library function yet (assuming it is not compiled, e.g., editing a S3 method). However, I put a breakpoint in my main function and then used the debugger to step into the code for the library of interest. In RStudio, the file says "Debug location is approximate because the source is not available." That's fine, but I would like to be able to put additional breakpoints into this "virtual file" so that I don't have to step line by line until I get to the line of interest. Placing these breakpoints does not seem to be possible.
I also can't figure out how to edit the file (which would presumably then support breakpoints). Perhaps I need to install the source locally but it is not clear how to do that. Also, I don't know what the implications of using the source code is. Would I need to manually compile any parts of the library that are actually compiled? My preference would be to have an installation option that allows for editing anything that is interpreted but that doesn't force me to compile everything that the standard installation method typically compiles on its own.
Try:
trace(Fun_name, edit = T)
I am new to the use of version control in RStudio. I would like to know what is the optimal way to do this:
I have a R project, and I can give one version of the project to a coworker.
Then he will modify some files (and me too).
When he gives the folder back to me, is there is simple way to compare two files and decide which which lines go to the final version?
The usual workflow for comparing files using builtin Rstudio is through version control tools such as git or subversion.
Your process is more "I give you the content of the project folder, make whatever you want and give it back to me" then "you want to know what have changed between your copy and his".
Rstudio won't help you in this case. You'd better use merge tools such as meld, winmerge, .. that will spot the differences between files and their content and allow you to copy changes in either way (from you to him or him to you)
I'm writing a single-page JavaScript application and I'm using Atom as my text-editor. (It's an Electron application, but that's besides the point.)
I'm also using the linter-jshint plugin for Atom. This is great, as it shows immediately in the text-editor when I make a typo in a variable, among other useful things.
Lately, my app has been getting very long. Naturally, I want to try and split it up across multiple files. After doing some research on StackOverflow, I've determined that I can use Grunt to automatically concatenate JavaScript files together. This is great because I don't have to refactor my code - I can just copy paste my existing functions into separate files. Easy!
However, once I do this, Atom fills up with warnings and errors from JSHint, because it can't find variables and functions that are located in the other files!
Now, I could just abandon the JHint plugin in Atom altogether and use the JSHint plugin for Grunt after the concatenation has already occured. But that sucks! I want the code that I'm going to be writing to be checked on the fly like a real IDE.
Is there a way to tell Atom/JSHint to assume that a bunch of JavaScript files will all be concatenated together? Or am I just approaching this problem completely wrong?
You can split your electron application with Node Common Modules, and use require('./state.js'); within your application.
Although I don't use Atom, that should allow for it to understand how you're using your variables and functions in other files.
Also this should eliminate your need for concatenation as the single-page app will have all it's dependencies accounted for.
i have this tree structure:
repository/modules/module1
repository/modules/module2
repository/modules/module..
repository/apps/application1
repository/apps/application2
repository/apps/application..
where the applications are using some modules.
now, I'd like to put some resources inside a module (like a very colorfull icons inside a widget used by several applications) but.. something gets wrong.
inside the module CMakeLists.txt if I use only:
set(${MODULE_NAME}_RCS
colors.qrc
)
...
qt4_add_resources (${MODULE_NAME}_RHEADERS ${${MODULE_NAME}_RCS})
no qrc_colors.cxx are created anywhere. so I've tried to add:
ADD_EXECUTABLE (${MODULE_NAME}
${${MODULE_NAME}_RHEADERS}
)
but.. I get this weird error:
CMake Error at repo/modules/ColorModule/CMakeLists.txt:51 (ADD_EXECUTABLE):
add_executable cannot create target "ColorModule" because another
target with the same name already exists. The existing target is a static
library created in source directory
"repo/modules/ColorModule". See documentation for
policy CMP0002 for more details.
(I've changed the path of the error of course)
so.. don't know what to think because i'm new both to cmake and qt..
what can i try?
EDIT:
if I add the ${MODULE_NAME}_RHEADERS and ${MODULE_NAME}_RCS in the add_library command the qrc_colors.cxx is created BUT it is in repository/modules/module1/built and not copied in the application built directory...
There is at least two errors in your code.
1) It is usually not necessary to use ${MODULE_NAME} everywhere like that, just "MODULE_NAME". You can see that the difference is the raw string vs. variable. It is usually recommended to avoid double variable value dereference if possible.
2) More importantly, you seem to be setting ${MODULE_NAME} in more than one executable place, which is "ColorModule" according to the error output. You should have individual executable names for different binaries.
Also, the resource file focus is a bit of red herring in here. There are several other issues with your project.
You can cmake files as CmakeLists.txt instead of CMakeLists.txt which inherently causes issues on case sensitive systes as my Linux box.
You use Findfoo.cmake, and find_package(foo) for that matter, rather than the usual FindFoo.cmake convention alongside find_package(Foo).
Your FindFoo.cmake is quite odd, and you should probably be rewritten.
Most importantly, you should use config files rather than find modules.
Documentation and examples can be found at these places:
http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake/Tutorials#CMake_Packages
https://projects.kde.org/projects/kde/kdeexamples/repository/revisions/master/show/buildsystem
When you would like use a find module, you need to have that at hand already. That will tell you what to look for, where things are, or if they are not anywhere where necessary. It is not something that you should write. You should just reuse existing ones for those projects that are not using cmake, and hence the find modules are added separately.
It is a bit like putting the treasure map just next to the treasure. Do you understand the irony? :) Once you find the map, you would automatically have the treasure as well. i.e. you would not look for it anymore.
While I am writing .R functions I constantly need to manually write source("funcname.r") to get the changes reflected in the workspace. I am sure it must be possible to do this automatically. So what I would like would be just to make changes in my function, save the function and be able to use the new function in R workspace without manually "sourcing" this function. How can I do that?
UPDATE: I know about selecting appropriate lines of code and pressing CTRL+R in R Editor (RGui) or using Notepad++ and executing the lines into R. But this approach has a disadvantage of making my workspace console "muddled". I would like to stop this practice if at all possible.
You can use R studio which has a source on save option.
If you are prepared to package your functions into a package, you may enjoy exploring Hadley's devtools package. This provides a suite of tools to write, test and document
packages.
https://github.com/hadley/devtools
This approach offer many advantages, but mainly reloading the package with a minimum of retyping.
You will still have to type load_all("yourpackage") but I find this small amount of typing is small beer compared to the advantages of devtools.
For additional information, including how to setup devtools, have a look at https://github.com/hadley/devtools/wiki/development
If you're using Eclipse + StatET, you can press CTRL+R+S, which saves your script and sources it. As close to automatic as I can get.
If you can get your text editor to run a system command after it saves the file, then you could use something like AutoIt (on Windows) or a batch script (on UNIX-derivative) to pass a call to source off to all running copies of R. But that's a heck of a lot of work for not much gain.
Still, I think it's much more likely to work being event-driven on the text editor end vs. having R constantly scan for updates (or somehow interface with the OS's update-event-messaging-system).
This is likely not possible (automatically detecting disc changes without intervention or running at least one line).
R needs to read into memory functions, so a change on the disc wouldn't be reflected in the workspace without reloading your functions.
If you are into developing R functions, some amount of messiness during your development process will be likely inevitable, but perhaps I could suggest that you try writing an R-package to house your functions?
This has the advantage of being able to robustly document your functions, using lazy loading so that you have access to your functions/datasets immediately without sourcing them.
Don't be afraid of making a package, it's easy with package.skeleton() and doesn't have to go on CRAN but could be for your own personal use without distribution! Just have fun!
Try to accept some messiness during development knowing you are working towards your goal and fighting the good fight of code organization and documentation!
We are only imperfect people, in an imperfect world, but we mean well!