Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
I wrote a program, and I'd like to write a manpage for it.
I started to learn Groff, and I really find it awful. The man macros are difficult to understand, difficult to use, and a real obstacle to productivity. The mdoc macros add a nice "semantic" extension, but they still suffer of limitations which make it incredibly hard. The resulting "code" is poor in maintainability.
Of course I know I can convert any modern markup language (say Markdown) into manpages via pandoc, but I dislike the result, and I'm not that fond of adding pandoc as dependency of my project, anyway.
Is there a way to obtain a decent manpage from a reasonable markup language?
I write manpages for the bash and ruby scripts I write.
I format them in markdown, which is a popular and simple text format.
Then I use a ruby gem called ronn to process the markdown into groff format with man macros. Ronn can also output html from the same markdown source.
OP here. After checking some alternatives, I decided to go for Asciidoc.
There are many alternatives indeed. For example, check this other question.
I also realized that there's no good answer to this question, given the fact that many tools can be used, and in the end it is just a matter of taste :)
I'll just vote for closing my own question (if anything it will remain as reference).
Related
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm not quite sure if stackoverflow is the correct site to post this on, but i dont see any other better fit for it when it comes to the stack exchange sites.
Vim has a lot of documentation, everything from free books to interactive learning, but there seems to be a piece missing, at least from what i can see.
Despite all the documentation im unable to find a complete list of all options that can be specified in a .vimrc file, does anyone know where this is documented ? It is not documented in :help vimrc or any other documentation ive seen, not even the free books ive looked at. The vim tricks wiki gives an intro like so many other pages on the web, but thats about it..no page or documentation seems to list all available options for the vimrc file. The man page doesnt even list a single option, only usage and command line options.
The books and other documentation are good at mentioning how to use vim but not how to configure the configuration file.
So, does someone know where i can find a complete list of all available options in the vimrc file ?
:help 'option' will take you to the documentation of any option. All of those are contained in a single documentation file named option.txt.
Additionally, you can obtain a special report that shows all options, a short help, and the current values via
:options
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I have read about 1/3 of the GNU Make manual, do you guys know of any resources to really learn the Art of using Make.
Ideally, there might be some examples where two ways of doing something are possible, and the author explains which method he chose and why.
I am primarily using Make not to build C/C++ programs but to operate a processing pipeline for data analysis.
Managing Projects with GNU Make, by Robert Mecklenburg, is the best I've come across. Plus, it's an O'Reilly Open Book, so O'Reilly gives away free PDFs of it on their website. Read it linearly, and start from the beginning (even if you think you already know the basics of GNU Make).
John Graham-Cumming has written a book called GNU Make Unleashed which looks promising, although I have not read it yet. http://www.lulu.com/product/paperback/gnu-make-unleashed/2937580 and http://jgc.org/
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
A friend is in search of a method to translate SPSS 'syntax' files to semantically equivalent R source code files.
I suppose, no one ever wrote a translator. But maybe I'm wrong.
PS: Please excuse the wrong use of 'syntax': People using SPSS tend to name an SPSS source program a 'syntax file' ;-)
The short answer is that sorry, you are right, there is no tool for automatically translating SPSS script to R script. Even worse, such a tool would likely take several (many?) man-years to create, so don't hold your breath.
A small concession is that it is probably not to hard to create a tool for translating very small, specific subsets of SPSS to R. For example, if you have a chunk of code for reading in CSV files, then you could use regular expressions to extract the useful bits from the SPSS code and autogenerate some R code from them. In most instances however it will be far easier and faster to manually port the code yourself.
If all else fails, ask Bob Muenchen; he know a lot about porting SPSS to R.
Another option for this is SPSStoR, which claims to be able to translate many common (but basic) SPSS procedures to R code. It seems to be under active development on GitHub as of August 2014.
I know it's been more than 3 years after the question was originally asked, but it's worth noting that a German company by the name of eoda is actually working on such software. It's called translateR. It is currently in beta status and you can register for a beta test on their website.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 7 years ago.
This post was edited and submitted for review 6 months ago and failed to reopen the post:
Original close reason(s) were not resolved
Improve this question
I am writing a program that needs a list of English words as a source file for it to work. I realise that these source files are available for students writing games such as Hangman or Crossword solvers but I am having trouble locating such a source file and wonder if anyone knows how I can attain one without slowly scraping websites and building up a dictionary manually.
What about /usr/share/dict/words on any Unix system? How many words are we talking about? Like OED-Unabridged?
For an English dictionary .txt file, you can use Custom Dictionary.
You can also generate a list aspell or wordlist with own settings.
Also you can take a look at http://wordlist.sourceforge.net/
Only english words: http://www.math.sjsu.edu/~foster/dictionary.txt
Also take a look at:
http://wordlist.sourceforge.net/
http://www.math.sjsu.edu/~foster/dictionary.txt
350,000 words
Very late, but might be useful for others.
There's also WordNet. Its data files format are well-documented.
I used it for building an embeddable dictionary library for iOS developers (www.lexicontext.com) and also in one of my apps.
#Future-searchers: you can use aspell to do the dictionary checks, it has bindings in ruby and python. It would make your job much simpler.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
I'd like to know if there exists a spreadsheet application which uses an existing functional-programming language to define functions.
I've already heard about Resolver One which uses python, but I'm more interested in anything which uses a purely functional language like Haskell.
Thanks
Spreadsheets are quite a popular application among functional programmers. They have been a recurring theme in papers over the years. Some of the more memorable papers include
Spreadsheet Functional Programming by David Wakeling (2007).
Forms/3 by Margaret Burnett and many others (2001)
Implementing Function Spreadsheets by Peter Sestoft (2008)
You can also read about an effort to make Excel more functional.
For each of these papers I have either read the paper or heard a talk based on the papers. None of the papers is fabulous but all of them are good. I think the one with the most interesting ideas is by Sestoft—and his experimental results are pretty amazing.
If you count JavaScript as a functional programming language you can use Google Web Scripts for Google Spreadsheets :)
There's Scheme In A Grid (http://siag.nu/siag/), but it's looking kind of out of date.
There's also Haxcel (http://www.mrtc.mdh.se/projects/Haxcel/), which was a thesis project.
If you want to do functional programming in a spreadsheet the best practical choice is probably Resolver One, as you've already noted. (I would say "functional programming" in this context means first-class functions that work with other spreadsheet functions and the sheet itself - i.e. you could write a function that returns a function, call it and have the result go in a cell for yet other cells to call, etc. I don't know if OpenOffice and Google Docs will do that.)
A colleague and I have been working on a little project to do this within Excel, using a syntax very close to Excel formulas. I described it briefly in a comment on Roy MacLeans's VBA Blog:
http://roymacleanvba.wordpress.com/2009/08/04/domain-specific-languages-%e2%80%93-part-2/#comment-130
It's changed some since I posted that, but if you want to call our very-minimal syntax a "language", it's certainly "pure". (And I'm still planning to release it to the vast universe of FP-implemented-in-VBA enthusiasts, but stuff keeps coming up...)
There is herculus.io
But it seems down currently.
The guide describes a concept I find very interesting: https://app.herculus.io/doc/guides/app/