Is there an include_once method in julia to include a file only once, like #pragma once or #ifndef in C++?
This answer elaborates a little on the comments. It is for beginners like me who stumbled across this post trying to figure out the basics of file organization, (before getting to slightly more advanced topics like module and package creation) and wondering why there isn't an easy way to do something like C++'s header guards.
The key is to include everything in the "lowest-level" file once, and nowhere else. An example: Assume you have main.jl, A.jl, B.jl, and C.jl. Assume:
-main.jl needs A.jl and B.jl and C.jl.
-A.jl needs B.jl and C.jl.
-B.jl needs C.jl.
The key here is to NOT use include statements in A.jl and B.jl. Instead, you find the “lowest-level” file, in this case main.jl, and put all the include statements there, in the correct order. In main.jl:
include("C.jl")
include("B.jl")
include("A.jl")
And then NO include statements ANYWHERE else. For more on this, see https://www.reddit.com/r/Julia/comments/hwxpgm/beginner_question_files_modules_and_include_vs/, particularly user a5sk6n’s outstanding answer in the comments.
Related
I have a hudge code, and where all the libraries are attached in the begining of the code. Now, I'm cleaning a bit this code, removing parts of it / re-writting other.
I was wondering if there was a way to know if a specific library is used or not by the code (in order to clean the library part too)? I could list, for each library, all the functions that are attached, then search in the code that this function are not called, but it will become long. I could also remove this library and try to run the code, but I don't like this solution (not enough robust).
I'm sorry if the question have already been asked, but so far, I haven't found any solution :(.
I am relatively new to Drupal. We have a site and I've been asked to jump in and make some changes. I'm working on customizing the output of the Webforms module. I'm having trouble doing so because I can't seem to find a reference to the various data structures Webforms uses.
For example, I need to change something in a preprocess hook. Passed into the hook is a structure called $variables. I can see that attributes are being added to the piece I want to change, so I know I'm in the right hook. What I want to do is add something to the text. But I can't figure out where in $variables the text is so I can change it.
I'm sure what I need to change is in there, but I can't seem to get at it. All the documentation I've found on the web is either "paste this code in" or assumes you know the data structures.
So:
1. Is there a reference anywhere to these structures? $variables is one. $submission, $components are others. There are probably more. I know their contents vary widely with the specific webform, but looking for a general reference.
2. How can I see the contents of one of the structures from inside a hook? I've tried a lot of things, but no luck. Would be great to either have it output to the Apache log, or show up on the screen, something...
Any help would be greatly appreciated. It feels like there's real power here, but I can't get at it because I'm missing some basics.
I would say you need to install 2 modules to figure out what is going on...
First Devel, allowing you to use the dmp function. This will output a whole array to the message area.
And then my new favorite module, Search Krumo.
A webform is generated from large array of data and finding the bit that is relevant to you can often be difficult just looking though the dmp output. Search Krumo puts a search box in the message area allowing you to search for any instances of a string in the whole array structure. When you've found the bit that is relevant it also lets you copy the path to that array element so you can easily modify values buried deep in multi-arrays.
EDIT:
If you don't want the output on the screen but would rather log it then use Devel Debug Log. Very useful for debugging ajax requests etc.
If you just need to log simple strings not whole arrays then the dd function is useful combined with: tail -f /tmp/drupal_debug.txt assuming you have SSH access.
I have a rather big library with a significant set of APIs that I need to expose. In fact, I'd like to expose the whole thing. There is a lot of namespacing going on, like:
FooLibrary.Bar
FooLibrary.Qux.Rumps
FooLibrary.Qux.Scrooge
..
Basically, what I would like to do is make sure that the user can access that whole namespace. I have had a whole bunch of trouble with this, and I'm totally new to closure, so I thought I'd ask for some input.
First, I need closurebuilder.py to send the full list of files to the closure compiler. This doesn't seem supported: --namespace Foo does not include Foo.Bar. --input only allows a single file, not a directory. Nor can I simply send my list of files to the closure compiler directly, because my code is also requiring things like "goog.assers", so I do need the resolver.
In fact, the only solution I can see is having a FooLibrary.ExposeAPI JS file that #require's everything. Surely that can't be right?
This is my main issue.
However, later the closure compiler, with ADVANCED_OPTIMIZATIONS on, will optimize all these names away. Now I can fix that by adding "#export" all over the place, which I am not happy about, but should work. I suppose it would also be valid to use an extern here. Or I could simply disable advanced optimizations.
What I can't do, apparently, is say "export FooLibrary.*". Wouldn't that make sense?
Finally, for working in source mode, I need to do goog.require() for every namespace I am using. This is merely an inconvenience, though I am mentioning because it sort of related to my trouble above. I would prefer to be able to do:
goog.requireRecursively('FooLibrary')
in order to pull all the child namespaces as well; thus, recreating with a single command the environment that I have when I am using the compiled version of my library.
I feel like I am possibly misunderstanding some things, or how Closure is supposed to be used. I'd be interested in looking at other Closure-based libraries to see how they solve this.
You are discovering that Closure-compiler is built more for the end consumer and not as much for the library author.
If you are exporting basically everything, then you would be better off with SIMPLE_OPTIMIZATIONS. I would still highly encourage you to maintain compatibility of your library with ADVANCED_OPTIMIZATIONS so that users can compile the library source with their project.
First, I need closurebuilder.py to send the full list of files to the closure compiler. ...
In fact, the only solution I can see is having a FooLibrary.ExposeAPI JS file that #require's everything. Surely that can't be right?
You would need to specify an --root of your source folder and specify the namespaces of the leaf nodes of your file dependency tree. You may have better luck with the now deprecated CalcDeps.py script. I still use it for some projects.
What I can't do, apparently, is say "export FooLibrary.*". Wouldn't that make sense?
You can't do that because it only makes sense based on the final usage. You as the library writer wish to export everything, but perhaps a consumer of your library wishes to include the source (uncompiled) version and have more dead code elimination. Library authors are stuck in a kind of middle ground between SIMPLE and ADVANCED optimization levels.
What I have done for this case is maintain a separate exports file for my namespace that exports everything. When compiling a standalone version of my library for distribution, the exports file is included in the compilation. However I can still include the library source (without the exports) into a project and get full dead code elimination. The work/payoff balance of this though must be weighed against just using SIMPLE_OPTIMIZATIONS for the standalone library.
My GeolocationMarker library has an example of this strategy.
If I have the structure:
api > v1 > *.go
I would like to be able to import api.v1 and from that, reflect out any of the types defined therein that satisfy, say, http.Handler.
I have reflect of types and methods down, but I can't seem to figure out how to just inspect anything that has a package v1 declaration and extract all types defined in there. Is this impossible to do?
Thanks!
If you don't use the imported code the compiler will not include it, so I think it's impossible.
If you are running the code somehow anyway (so it is included) you might as well just have it call a register function to register itself.
Programming in Go usually doesn't include the sort of "magic" you are asking for. At first it felt limiting to me, but I got used to it after a while and now I appreciate that things are what they look like, if that makes sense.
I'm analyzing some legacy code. It is about 80.000 lines of old plsql code. On a fist look there is quite some duplication in the source which needs to be removed. Instead off doing diff's manual and looking at each file there must be some tool/commandline confu out there to detect duplicate lines of source code.
My goal is to make an educated guess about the minimal size of a rewrite of source and about how much actual knowledge is captured in this program. I wrote some a basic static code analyzer to find the amount of control statements IF ELSE FOR etc and Functions in each file.
But duplicated code still needs to be removed from my statistics.
Have you looked at Simian - Similarity Analyser? (Just checked and it's no longer free, but it is available for a period of 15 days for evaluation purposes.)
Simian (Similarity Analyser)
identifies duplication in Java, C#, C,
C++, COBOL, Ruby, JSP, ASP, HTML, XML,
Visual Basic, Groovy source code and
even plain text files. In fact, simian
can be used on any human readable
files such as ini files, deployment
descriptors, you name it.
I have used it in practice and it does work well.
Sonar has duplication detection and claims to support PL/SQL, though I've never used it for that.
You would need to beg/borrow/steal/write a plsql parser and compare the resulting abstract syntax trees. With the size of the code base you have, that might be worthwhile. There would be other uses for the parser once you're done.
How about this:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/sddforeclipse/
It is opensource, and is said to be used by commercial software. It is a plugin to Eclipse, by the way.