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
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 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).
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 have a very simple question really. There's a demo function demo() i.e. demo(scoping) which runs a demo of the topic. How do I write something like this for my own package? Its crazy but I have tried googling for any documentation related to it but there is none available (either that or my googling skills suck big time). I tried the documentation for devtools and roxygen too but maybe I missed it.
Can anyone point me in a right direction? Are there any packages which can generate it during the package installation? Or do I have to write it manually (I'm totally fine with that but right now I have zero information on this).
And yes, I would want to be able to do it in R console (not rstudio).
While roxygen2 does not allow you to create demos, it does allow you to include special #examples within the documentation[1]. These showup in your function or object help pages and can even be run automatically upon loading the package to test for functioning dependencies, or they can just serve as examples to your end users.
devtools on the other hand offers vignettes which is a "long-form guide to your package"[2]. These can be accessed through your overall package documentation and actually linked to anywhere within your documentation. You can make multiple vignettes and make them function or work-flow specific, organized by function family or something similar.
If you are adamant about using demos, you'll have to manually go through the trouble of establishing the proper directories, formatting and testing the demo files. If you do intend to go down this path, Hadley Wickham has some very sparse documentation on the subject here: [3].
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 5 years ago.
Improve this question
My hyperSpec package provides functions to work with spectoscopic data sets. I provide hyperSpec-methods for quite a number of functions coming from other packages. However, some of these other packages, I have listed as Suggests: as I do not want to force users to install something like 20 other packages (counting dependencies) if they may never use the specific functionality.
From the coding point of view, that works nicely. However, I'm at a loss how to deal with that in the .Rd file - but I'm sure it is a rather common problem.
The usual \code{\link[otherpkg]{fun}} will not reliably work, as there is no guarantee that otherpkg is available. If otherpkg is not installed, then the link is broken. That will be detected by R CMD check e.g. on Winbuilder and r-forge. Which means: the package won't pass CRAN checks.
Which packages would be a good example to look at?
The only hint (though no solution) I found so far: https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-devel/2009-November/055425.html (but there was no answer to that email).
The Cross-References section of Writing R Extensions says that to link to other packages use
\link[otherpkg]{foo}
with the tricky / inscrutable thing being that foo is the name of the html help page that you want to link to (within a package, there would be no need for [mypkg] and foo would be an \alias in another man page). The name of the help page is determined by the \name directive in the Rd file defining the help you're interested in retrieving.
In the end, I made otherpkg a dependency.
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 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I am doing a project, for which I need to know all the wikipedia article names (I don't need the content). Is there a place where I can download this data.
Check out this page here on Wikipedia - there is an option to just download an archive with the names of the articles. Here's the actual path to the download page:
All Titles (gzipped) - 32+ Mb at the time of posting.
Edit:
You may notice non-English titles appearing in the list (and some profanity - be advised) contained in enwiki-latest-all-titles-in-ns0.gz. This is because by default most people create content on the main English wiki (language code en). If you were to investigate other language dumps you will observe there are different sets of articles.
Reading on the main download page, there are references to being able to use the Wikipedia API to perform some types of querying on Wikipedia, but I'm not sure this will resolve your problem (taxonomy of the pages doesn't seem to provide a simple way to differentiate "English" content vs "content on English wiki").
I'm not aware of any central list of articles, but if you just need a large number of them rather than a complete list (bearing in mind that any complete list will always be out of date anyway) then you could probably put something together with wget to recursively follow links within wikipedia from the main page and store the URLs you get.