From the code mostly from the sample of myhdl:
from myhdl import Signal, intbv, delay, always, now, Simulation, toVerilog
__debug = True
def ClkDriver(clk):
halfPeriod = delay(10)
#always(halfPeriod)
def driveClk():
clk.next = not clk
return driveClk
def HelloWorld(clk, outs):
counts = intbv(3)[32:]
#always(clk.posedge)
def sayHello():
outs.next = not outs
if counts >= 3 - 1:
counts.next = 0
else:
counts.next = counts + 1
if __debug__:
print "%s Hello World! outs %s %s" % (
now(), str(outs), str(outs.next))
return sayHello
clk = Signal(bool(0))
outs = Signal(intbv(0)[1:])
clkdriver_inst = ClkDriver(clk)
hello_inst = toVerilog(HelloWorld, clk, outs)
sim = Simulation(clkdriver_inst, hello_inst)
sim.run(150)
I expect it to generate a verilog program that contains an initial block, like something:
module HelloWorld(...)
reg [31:0] counts;
initial begin
counts = 32'h3
end
always #(...
How can you get the initial block generated?
Note that on the google cache for old.myhdl.org/doku.php/dev:initial_values it links to example https://bitbucket.org/cfelton/examples/src/tip/ramrom/ . So it looks the feature should be supported. However the rom sample generates static case statements. That's not what I'm looking for.
Three steps to resolve it:
Update to the latest myhdl on master or a version that contains the hash 87784ad which added the feature under issue #105 or #150. As an example for virtualenv, run a git clone, followed by pip install -e <path-to-myhdl-dir>.
Change the signal to a list.
Set toVerilog.initial_values=True before calling toVerilog.
Code snippet follows.
def HelloWorld(clk, outs):
counts = [Signal(intbv(3)[32:])]
#always(clk.posedge)
def sayHello():
outs.next = not outs
if counts[0] >= 3 - 1:
counts[0].next = 0
else:
counts[0].next = counts[0] + 1
if __debug__:
print "%s Hello World! outs %s %s %d" % (
now(), str(outs), str(outs.next), counts[0])
return sayHello
clk = Signal(bool(0))
outs = Signal(intbv(0)[1:])
clkdriver_inst = ClkDriver(clk)
toVerilog.initial_values=True
hello_inst = toVerilog(HelloWorld, clk, outs)
sim = Simulation(clkdriver_inst, hello_inst)
sim.run(150)
Related
I want to do a system using a Autorules fuzzy controller where i create rules from process real data.
My problem is when i use the new data to simulate the fuzzy controller with the rules extracted of the older data, i get a error about the crisp output that cannot be calculated because do not exist rules enough, what is totally normal because my fuzzy system needs more rules and that's my point! I want to implement a new routine that analyses the crisp input/output and create new rules from this data, after that, i want to go back in my code and simulate again.
Is there a function that blocks the AssertionError from stop the code and redirect to another def or to a previously code line?
I tried to find some lib with a function that allows me to redirect the error steady to stop the code but no sucess. I think i will have to change the skfuzzy defuzz def code to allow to make it.
Thank you very much.
''' python
step = stp_ini
k = 0
delay = stp_ini
end = stp_fim - stp_ini
Tout_sim = pd.DataFrame(columns=['val'])
Vent_sim = pd.DataFrame(columns=['val'])
start = timeit.default_timer()
for step in range(end-k):
clear_output(wait=True)
simulation.input['PCA1'] = comp1n[step+delay]
simulation.input['PCA2'] = comp2n[step+delay]
simulation.input['PCA3'] = comp3n[step+delay]
simulation.input['PCA4'] = comp4n[step+delay]
simulation.input['Vent'] = dataoutf.NumVentOn[step+delay]
simulation.compute()
Tout_sim = Tout_sim.append({'val':simulation.output['Tout']},ignore_index=True)
stop = timeit.default_timer()
if ((step/(stp_fim-k-1))*100) < 5:
expected_time = "Calculating..."
else:
time_perc = timeit.default_timer()
expected_time = np.round( ( (time_perc-start)/(step/(end-k-1)) )/60,2)
'''
~\AppData\Local\Continuum\anaconda3\lib\site-packages\skfuzzy\control\controlsystem.py in defuzz(self)
587 self.var.defuzzify_method)
588 except AssertionError:
--> 589 raise ValueError("Crisp output cannot be calculated, likely "
590 "because the system is too sparse. Check to "
591 "make sure this set of input values will "
ValueError: Crisp output cannot be calculated, likely because the system is too sparse. Check to make sure this set of input values will activate at least one connected Term in each Antecedent via the current set of Rules.
edit:
I try to wrap the line code ValueError by try but the ValueError is activated yet
def defuzz(self):
"""Derive crisp value based on membership of adjective(s)."""
if not self.sim._array_inputs:
ups_universe, output_mf, cut_mfs = self.find_memberships()
if len(cut_mfs) == 0:
raise ValueError("No terms have memberships. Make sure you "
"have at least one rule connected to this "
"variable and have run the rules calculation.")
try:
return defuzz(ups_universe, output_mf,
self.var.defuzzify_method)
except AssertionError:
try:
new_c1 = []
new_c2 = []
new_c3 = []
new_c4 = []
new_vent = []
new_tout = []
newcondition1 = []
newcondition2 = []
newcondition3 = []
newcondition4 = []
newcondition5 = []
newcondition6 = []
#input
n = 0
for n in range(len(namespca)):
new_c1.append(fuzz.interp_membership(PCA1.universe, PCA1[namespcapd.name.loc[n]].mf, comp1n[step]))
new_c2.append(fuzz.interp_membership(PCA2.universe, PCA2[namespcapd.name.loc[n]].mf, comp2n[step]))
new_c3.append(fuzz.interp_membership(PCA3.universe, PCA3[namespcapd.name.loc[n]].mf, comp3n[step]))
new_c4.append(fuzz.interp_membership(PCA4.universe, PCA4[namespcapd.name.loc[n]].mf, comp4n[step]))
n = 0
for n in range(len(namesvent)):
new_vent.append(fuzz.interp_membership(Vent.universe, Vent[namesventpd.name.loc[n]].mf, dataoutf.NumVentOn[step]))
#output
n = 0
for n in range(len(namestemp)):
new_tout.append(fuzz.interp_membership(Tout.universe, Tout[namestemppd.name.loc[n]].mf, dataoutf.TsaidaHT[step]))
#new_c1 = np.transpose(new_c1)
new_c1_conv = pd.DataFrame(new_c1)
#new_c2 = np.transpose(new_c2)
new_c2_conv = pd.DataFrame(new_c2)
#new_c3 = np.transpose(new_c3)
new_c3_conv = pd.DataFrame(new_c3)
#new_c4 = np.transpose(new_c4)
new_c4_conv = pd.DataFrame(new_c4)
#new_vent = np.transpose(new_vent)
new_vent_conv = pd.DataFrame(new_vent)
#new_tout = np.transpose(new_tout)
new_tout_conv = pd.DataFrame(new_tout)
i=0
for i in range(pcamf):
newcondition1.append([new_c1_conv.idxmax(axis=0) == i])
newcondition2.append([new_c2_conv.idxmax(axis=0) == i])
newcondition3.append([new_c3_conv.idxmax(axis=0) == i])
newcondition4.append([new_c4_conv.idxmax(axis=0) == i])
i=0
for i in range(ventmf):
newcondition5.append([new_vent_conv.idxmax(axis=0) == i])
i=0
for i in range(tempmf):
newcondition6.append([new_tout_conv.idxmax(axis=0) == i])
choicelistpca = namespca
choicelistvent = namesvent
choicelisttout = namestemp
new_c1_rules = np.select(newcondition1, choicelistpca)
new_c2_rules = np.select(newcondition2, choicelistpca)
new_c3_rules = np.select(newcondition3, choicelistpca)
new_c4_rules = np.select(newcondition4, choicelistpca)
new_vent_rules = np.select(newcondition5, choicelistvent)
new_tout_rules = np.select(newcondition6, choicelisttout)
new_rules = np.vstack([new_c1_rules,new_c2_rules,new_c3_rules,new_c4_rules,new_vent_rules,new_tout_rules])
new_rules = new_rules.T
new_rulespd = pd.DataFrame(new_rules,columns=['PCA1','PCA2','PCA3','PCA4','Vent','Tout'])
#Checar se a nova regra está dentro do conjunto de regras fuzzy atual
if pd.merge(new_rulespd,AutoRules, on=['PCA1','PCA2','PCA3','PCA4','Vent','Tout'],how='inner').empty:
print('Nova regra não encontrada no conjunto atual de regras fuzzy!')
else:
pd.merge(new_rulespd,AutoRules, on=['PCA1','PCA2','PCA3','PCA4','Vent','Tout'],how='inner')
"""except AssertionError:
raise ValueError("Crisp output cannot be calculated, likely "
"because the system is too sparse. Check to "
"make sure this set of input values will "
"activate at least one connected Term in each "
"Antecedent via the current set of Rules.")"""
else:
# Calculate using array-aware version, one cut at a time.
output = np.zeros(self.sim._array_shape, dtype=np.float64)
it = np.nditer(output, ['multi_index'], [['writeonly', 'allocate']])
for out in it:
universe, mf = self.find_memberships_nd(it.multi_index)
out[...] = defuzz(universe, mf, self.var.defuzzify_method)
return output
Wrap the line of code that raises ValueError in a try. And decide what to do in its except ValueError: clause. Perhaps continue-ing on to the next iteration might be reasonable.
I've been trying to use the IDAPython API to adjust the compiler setting in a script, but I can't seem to get any function to work properly. Some of the things I've attempted:
1.
Python>SetLongPrm(INF_COMPILER, COMP_MS)
This leaves me with the compiler id set to the right value, but for some reason it sets all the other compiler related values to 0 or something similar. Giving me an error about the Pointer Size not being right and int size not being a valid value.
2.
Python>idaapi.set_compiler_id(2)
False
This just straight up doesn't work, but this would probably end up the same as the first command.
3.
class compiler_info_t(object):
id = COMP_MS
cm = 0x3 | 0x00 | 0x30
size_i = 4
size_b = 1
size_e = 4
defalign = 0
size_s = 2
size_l = 4
size_ll = 8
def __init__(self, *args):
"""
__init__(self) -> compiler_info_t
"""
this = _idaapi.new_compiler_info_t(*args)
try: self.this.append(this)
except: self.this = this
My last attempt was to try and make my own compiler_info_t object to pass to idaapi.set_compiler(), but since "_idaapi" isn't a module i can import normally it won't let me call new_compiler_info_t().
Question:
Is there a way to, perhaps, individually set/fix the compiler values for pointer size, memory model, and calling convention?
If not, is there a different way to completely adjust the compiler, analogous to how it would function if you changed it by hand in the compiler settings window?
Here is my example: "Set Compiler defaults for Visual C++"
def print_compiler(id):
print '-'*(80)
abbr = ida_typeinf.get_compiler_abbr(id)
name = ida_typeinf.get_compiler_name(id)
print "id: %d (%s)" % (id,abbr)
print "Compiler: '%s'" % name
im = idc.get_inf_attr(INF_COMPILER)
print "Calling model: %02X" % im.cm
print "Defauil alignments: %d" % im.defalign
print "sizeof(int): %d\tsizeof(short): %d" % (im.size_i,im.size_s)
print "sizeof(bool): %d\tsizeof(long): %d" % (im.size_b,im.size_l)
print "sizeof(enum): %d\tsizeof(longlong): %d" % (im.size_e,im.size_ll)
print "sizeof(long double): %d" % (im.size_ldbl)
print "Predefined macros: '%s'" % ida_idp.cfg_get_cc_predefined_macros(id)
print "Included directories: '%s'" % ida_idp.cfg_get_cc_header_path(id)
print '-'*(80)
# Print Old Compiler settings by ID
print_compiler(idc.get_inf_attr(INF_COMPILER).id)
# Set Compiler defaults for Visual C++
im = idc.get_inf_attr(INF_COMPILER) # Get current settings
im.id = ida_typeinf.COMP_MS
im.cm = 0x03 | 0x00 | 0x30
im.defalign = 0
im.size_i = 4
im.size_b = 1
im.size_e = 4
im.size_s = 2
im.size_l = 4
im.size_ll = 8
im.size_ldbl = 8
# Replace predefined macros and included directories by id
# from IDA.CFG (see 'CC_PARMS' in Built-in C parser parameters)
ida_typeinf.set_c_macros(ida_idp.cfg_get_cc_predefined_macros(im.id))
ida_typeinf.set_c_header_path(ida_idp.cfg_get_cc_header_path(im.id))
# Resetting new settings :)
idc.set_inf_attr(INF_COMPILER, im.id)
# Print New Compiler settings by ID
print_compiler(im.id)
Using a Korean Input Method Editor (IME), it's possible to type 버리 + 어 and it will automatically become 버려.
Is there a way to programmatically do that in Python?
>>> x, y = '버리', '어'
>>> z = '버려'
>>> ord(z[-1])
47140
>>> ord(x[-1]), ord(y)
(47532, 50612)
Is there a way to compute that 47532 + 50612 -> 47140?
Here's some more examples:
가보 + 아 -> 가봐
끝나 + ㄹ -> 끝날
I'm a Korean. First, if you type 버리 + 어, it becomes 버리어 not 버려. 버려 is an abbreviation of 버리어 and it's not automatically generated. Also 가보아 cannot becomes 가봐 automatically during typing by the same reason.
Second, by contrast, 끝나 + ㄹ becomes 끝날 because 나 has no jongseong(종성). Note that one character of Hangul is made of choseong(초성), jungseong(중성), and jongseong. choseong and jongseong are a consonant, jungseong is a vowel. See more at Wikipedia. So only when there's no jongseong during typing (like 끝나), there's a chance that it can have jongseong(ㄹ).
If you want to make 버리 + 어 to 버려, you should implement some Korean language grammar like, especially for this case, abbreviation of jungseong. For example ㅣ + ㅓ = ㅕ, ㅗ + ㅏ = ㅘ as you provided. 한글 맞춤법 chapter 4. section 5 (I can't find English pages right now) defines abbreviation like this. It's possible, but not so easy job especially for non-Koreans.
Next, if what you want is just to make 끝나 + ㄹ to 끝날, it can be a relatively easy job since there're libraries which can handle composition and decomposition of choseong, jungseong, jongseong. In case of Python, I found hgtk. You can try like this (nonpractical code):
# hgtk methods take one character at a time
cjj1 = hgtk.letter.decompose('나') # ('ㄴ', 'ㅏ', '')
cjj2 = hgtk.letter.decompose('ㄹ') # ('ㄹ', '', '')
if cjj1[2]) == '' and cjj2[1]) == '':
cjj = (cjj1[0], cjj1[1], cjj2[0])
cjj2 = None
Still, without proper knowledge of Hangul, it will be very hard to get it done.
You could use your own Translation table.
The drawback is you have to input all pairs manual or you have a file to get it from.
For instance:
# Sample Korean chars to map
k = [[('버리', '어'), ('버려')], [('가보', '아'), ('가봐')], [('끝나', 'ㄹ'), ('끝날')]]
class Korean(object):
def __init__(self):
self.map = {}
for m in k:
key = m[0][0] + m[0][1]
self.map[hash(key)] = m[1]
def __getitem__(self, item):
return self.map[hash(item)]
def translate(self, s):
return [ self.map[hash(token)] for token in s]
if __name__ == '__main__':
k_map = Korean()
k_chars = [ m[0][0] + m[0][1] for m in k]
print('Input: %s' % k_chars)
print('Output: %s' % k_map.translate(k_chars))
one_char_3 = k[0][0][0] + k[0][0][1]
print('%s = %s' % (one_char_3, k_map[ one_char_3 ]) )
Input: ['버리어', '가보아', '끝나ㄹ']
Output: ['버려', '가봐', '끝날']
버리어 = 버려
Tested with Python:3.4.2
I want to compare two strings in a python unittest which contain html.
Is there a method which outputs the result in a human friendly (diff like) version?
A simple method is to strip whitespace from the HTML and split it into a list. Python 2.7's unittest (or the backported unittest2) then gives a human-readable diff between the lists.
import re
def split_html(html):
return re.split(r'\s*\n\s*', html.strip())
def test_render_html():
expected = ['<div>', '...', '</div>']
got = split_html(render_html())
self.assertEqual(expected, got)
If I'm writing a test for working code, I usually first set expected = [], insert a self.maxDiff = None before the assert and let the test fail once. The expected list can then be copy-pasted from the test output.
You might need to tweak how whitespace is stripped depending on what your HTML looks like.
I submitted a patch to do this some years back. The patch was rejected but you can still view it on the python bug list.
I doubt you would want to hack your unittest.py to apply the patch (if it even still works after all this time), but here's the function for reducing two strings a manageable size while still keeping at least part of what differs. So long as all you didn't want the complete differences this might be what you want:
def shortdiff(x,y):
'''shortdiff(x,y)
Compare strings x and y and display differences.
If the strings are too long, shorten them to fit
in one line, while still keeping at least some difference.
'''
import difflib
LINELEN = 79
def limit(s):
if len(s) > LINELEN:
return s[:LINELEN-3] + '...'
return s
def firstdiff(s, t):
span = 1000
for pos in range(0, max(len(s), len(t)), span):
if s[pos:pos+span] != t[pos:pos+span]:
for index in range(pos, pos+span):
if s[index:index+1] != t[index:index+1]:
return index
left = LINELEN/4
index = firstdiff(x, y)
if index > left + 7:
x = x[:left] + '...' + x[index-4:index+LINELEN]
y = y[:left] + '...' + y[index-4:index+LINELEN]
else:
x, y = x[:LINELEN+1], y[:LINELEN+1]
left = 0
cruncher = difflib.SequenceMatcher(None)
xtags = ytags = ""
cruncher.set_seqs(x, y)
editchars = { 'replace': ('^', '^'),
'delete': ('-', ''),
'insert': ('', '+'),
'equal': (' ',' ') }
for tag, xi1, xi2, yj1, yj2 in cruncher.get_opcodes():
lx, ly = xi2 - xi1, yj2 - yj1
edits = editchars[tag]
xtags += edits[0] * lx
ytags += edits[1] * ly
# Include ellipsis in edits line.
if left:
xtags = xtags[:left] + '...' + xtags[left+3:]
ytags = ytags[:left] + '...' + ytags[left+3:]
diffs = [ x, xtags, y, ytags ]
if max([len(s) for s in diffs]) < LINELEN:
return '\n'.join(diffs)
diffs = [ limit(s) for s in diffs ]
return '\n'.join(diffs)
Maybe this is a quite 'verbose' solution. You could add a new 'equality function' for your user defined type (e.g: HTMLString) which you have to define first:
class HTMLString(str):
pass
Now you have to define a type equality function:
def assertHTMLStringEqual(first, second):
if first != second:
message = ... # TODO here: format your message, e.g a diff
raise AssertionError(message)
All you have to do is format your message as you like. You can also use a class method in your specific TestCase as a type equality function. This gives you more functionality to format your message, since unittest.TestCase does this a lot.
Now you have to register this equality function in your unittest.TestCase:
...
def __init__(self):
self.addTypeEqualityFunc(HTMLString, assertHTMLStringEqual)
The same for a class method:
...
def __init__(self):
self.addTypeEqualityFunc(HTMLString, 'assertHTMLStringEqual')
And now you can use it in your tests:
def test_something(self):
htmlstring1 = HTMLString(...)
htmlstring2 = HTMLString(...)
self.assertEqual(htmlstring1, htmlstring2)
This should work well with python 2.7.
I (the one asking this question) use BeautfulSoup now:
def assertEqualHTML(string1, string2, file1='', file2=''):
u'''
Compare two unicode strings containing HTML.
A human friendly diff goes to logging.error() if there
are not equal, and an exception gets raised.
'''
from BeautifulSoup import BeautifulSoup as bs
import difflib
def short(mystr):
max=20
if len(mystr)>max:
return mystr[:max]
return mystr
p=[]
for mystr, file in [(string1, file1), (string2, file2)]:
if not isinstance(mystr, unicode):
raise Exception(u'string ist not unicode: %r %s' % (short(mystr), file))
soup=bs(mystr)
pretty=soup.prettify()
p.append(pretty)
if p[0]!=p[1]:
for line in difflib.unified_diff(p[0].splitlines(), p[1].splitlines(), fromfile=file1, tofile=file2):
logging.error(line)
raise Exception('Not equal %s %s' % (file1, file2))
I have a for loop which references a dictionary and prints out the value associated with the key. Code is below:
for i in data:
if i in dict:
print dict[i],
How would i format the output so a new line is created every 60 characters? and with the character count along the side for example:
0001
MRQLLLISDLDNTWVGDQQALEHLQEYLGDRRGNFYLAYATGRSYHSARELQKQVGLMEP
0061
DYWLTAVGSEIYHPEGLDQHWADYLSEHWQRDILQAIADGFEALKPQSPLEQNPWKISYH
0121 LDPQACPTVIDQLTEMLKETGIPVQVIFSSGKDVDLLPQRSNKGNATQYLQQHLAMEPSQ
It's a finicky formatting problem, but I think the following code:
import sys
class EveryN(object):
def __init__(self, n, outs):
self.n = n # chars/line
self.outs = outs # output stream
self.numo = 1 # next tag to write
self.tll = 0 # tot chars on this line
def write(self, s):
while True:
if self.tll == 0: # start of line: emit tag
self.outs.write('%4.4d ' % self.numo)
self.numo += self.n
# wite up to N chars/line, no more
numw = min(len(s), self.n - self.tll)
self.outs.write(s[:numw])
self.tll += numw
if self.tll >= self.n:
self.tll = 0
self.outs.write('\n')
s = s[numw:]
if not s: break
if __name__ == '__main__':
sys.stdout = EveryN(60, sys.stdout)
for i, a in enumerate('abcdefgh'):
print a*(5+ i*5),
shows how to do it -- the output when running for demonstration purposes as the main script (five a's, ten b's, etc, with spaces in-between) is:
0001 aaaaa bbbbbbbbbb ccccccccccccccc dddddddddddddddddddd eeeeee
0061 eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff ggggggggg
0121 gggggggggggggggggggggggggg hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
0181 hhhhhhh
# test data
data = range(10)
the_dict = dict((i, str(i)*200) for i in range( 10 ))
# your loops as a generator
lines = ( the_dict[i] for i in data if i in the_dict )
def format( line ):
def splitter():
k = 0
while True:
r = line[k:k+60] # take a 60 char block
if r: # if there are any chars left
yield "%04d %s" % (k+1, r) # format them
else:
break
k += 60
return '\n'.join(splitter()) # join all the numbered blocks
for line in lines:
print format(line)
I haven't tested it on actual data, but I believe the code below would do the job. It first builds up the whole string, then outputs it a 60-character line at a time. It uses the three-argument version of range() to count by 60.
s = ''.join(dict[i] for i in data if i in dict)
for i in range(0, len(s), 60):
print '%04d %s' % (i+1, s[i:i+60])
It seems like you're looking for textwrap
The textwrap module provides two convenience functions, wrap() and
fill(), as well as TextWrapper, the class that does all the work, and
a utility function dedent(). If you’re just wrapping or filling one or
two text strings, the convenience functions should be good enough;
otherwise, you should use an instance of TextWrapper for efficiency.