Just wondering...
I find using escape characters too distracting. I'd rather do something like this (console code):
>>> print ^'Let's begin and end with sets of unlikely 2 chars and bingo!'^
Let's begin and end with sets of unlikely 2 chars and bingo!
Note the ' inside the string, and how this syntax would have no issue with it, or whatever else inside for basically all cases. Too bad markdown can't properly colorize it (yet), so I decided to <pre> it.
Sure, the ^ could be any other char, I'm not sure what would look/work better. That sounds good enough to me, tho.
Probably some other language already have a similar solution. And, just maybe, Python already have such a feature and I overlooked it. I hope this is the case.
But if it isn't, would it be too hard to, somehow, change Python's interpreter and be able to select an arbitrary (or even standardized) syntax for notating the strings?
I realize there are many ways to change statements and the whole syntax in general by using pre-compilators, but this is far more specific. And going any of those routes is what I call "too hard". I'm not really needing to do this so, again, I'm just wondering.
Python has this use """ or ''' as the delimiters
print '''Let's begin and end with sets of unlikely 2 chars and bingo'''
How often do you have both of 3' and 3" in a string
Related
This is a rather generic question, but I have a textfile that I want to edit using a script.
What are some ways to format text, so that it will visually stand out but still be recognized by my script?
It works fine when I use text_to_be_replaced, but it is hard to find when you have a large file.
Tried searching, and it seems that the common ways are:
%text_to_be_replaced%
<text_to_be_replaced>
$(text_to_be_replaced)
But maybe there is a commonly used/widely accepted way to format text for visibility?
The language the script is written in is python, if that matters... but I'm looking for a more-or-less generic soluting which will work 90% of the time.
I'm not aware of any generic standard here, but if it's meant to be replaced, you can use the new string formatting method as follows:
string = 'some text {add_text_here} some more text'
Then to replace it when you need to:
value = 'formatted'
string = string.format(add_text_here=value)
Now print it out:
>>> string
'some text formatted some more text'
In fact, this quite neat at the addition of curly {brackets} around the text that needs to be replaced also may make it stand out a little.
At first I thought that {{curly braces}} would be fine, but than I went with $ALLCAPS.
First of all, caps really stands out, while lowercase may be confused with the rest of the code.
And while it $REALLYSTANDSOUT, it shouldn't cause any problems, since it's just a "bookmark" in a text file, and will be replaced with the appropriate stuff determined by the script.
I am writing a lexer + parser in JFlex + CUP, and I wanted to have Python-like syntax regarding blocks; that is, indentation marks the block level.
I am unsure of how to tackle this, and whether it should be done at the lexical or sintax level.
My current approach is to solve the issue at the lexical level - newlines are parsed as instruction separators, and when one is processed I move the lexer to a special state which checks how many characters are in front of the new line and remembers in which column the last line started, and accordingly introduces and open block or close block character.
However, I am running into all sort of trouble. For example:
JFlex cannot match empty strings, so my instructions need to have at least one blanck after every newline.
I cannot close two blocks at the same time with this approach.
Is my approach correct? Should I be doing things different?
Your approach of handling indents in the lexer rather than the parser is correct. Well, it’s doable either way, but this is usually the easier way, and it’s the way Python itself (or at least CPython and PyPy) does it.
I don’t know much about JFlex, and you haven’t given us any code to work with, but I can explain in general terms.
For your first problem, you're already putting the lexer into a special state after the newline, so that "grab 0 or more spaces" should be doable by escaping from the normal flow of things and just running a regex against the line.
For your second problem, the simplest solution (and the one Python uses) is to keep a stack of indents. I'll demonstrate something a bit simpler than what Python does.
First:
indents = [0]
After each newline, grab a run of 0 or more spaces as spaces. Then:
if len(spaces) == indents[-1]:
pass
elif len(spaces) > indents[-1]:
indents.append(len(spaces))
emit(INDENT_TOKEN)
else:
while len(spaces) != indents[-1]:
indents.pop()
emit(DEDENT_TOKEN)
Now your parser just sees INDENT_TOKEN and DEDENT_TOKEN, which are no different from, say, OPEN_BRACE_TOKEN and CLOSE_BRACE_TOKEN in a C-like language.
Of you’d want better error handling—raise some kind of tokenizer error rather than an implicit IndexError, maybe use < instead of != so you can detect that you’ve gone too far instead of exhausting the stack (for better error recovery if you want to continue to emit further errors instead of bailing at the first one), etc.
For real-life example code (with error handling, and tabs as well as spaces, and backslash newline escaping, and handling non-syntactic indentation inside of parenthesized expressions, etc.), see the tokenize docs and source in the stdlib.
What is the purpose of the colon before a block in Python?
Example:
if n == 0:
print "The end"
The colon is there to declare the start of an indented block.
Technically, it's not necessary; you could just indent and de-indent when the block is done. However, based on the Python koan “explicit is better than implicit” (EIBTI), I believe that Guido deliberately made the colon obligatory, so any statement that should be followed by indented code ends in a colon. (It also allows one-liners if you continue after the colon, but this style is not in wide use.)
It also makes the work of syntax-aware auto-indenting editors easier, which also counted in the decision.
This question turns out to be a Python FAQ, and I found one of its answers by Guido here:
Why are colons required for the if/while/def/class statements?
The colon is required primarily to enhance readability (one of the results of the experimental ABC language). Consider this:
if a == b
print a
versus
if a == b:
print a
Notice how the second one is slightly easier to read. Notice further how a colon sets off the example in this FAQ answer; it’s a standard usage in English.
Another minor reason is that the colon makes it easier for editors with syntax highlighting; they can look for colons to decide when indentation needs to be increased instead of having to do a more elaborate parsing of the program text.
Consider the following list of things to buy from the grocery store, written in Pewprikanese.
pewkah
lalala
chunkykachoo
pewpewpew
skunkybacon
When I read that, I'm confused, Are chunkykachoo and pewpewpew a kind of lalala? Or what if chunkykachoo and pewpewpew are indented just because they are special items?
Now see what happens when my Pewprikanese friend add a colon to help me parse the list better: (<-- like this)
pewkah
lalala: (<-- see this colon)
chunkykachoo
pewpewpew
skunkybacon
Now it's clear that chunkykachoo and pewpewpew are a kind of lalala.
Let's say there is a person who's starting to learn Python, which happens to be her first programming language to learn. Without colons, there's a considerable probability that she's going to keep thinking "this lines are indented because this lines are like special items.", and it could take a while to realize that that's not the best way to think about indentation.
Three reasons:
To increase readability. The colon helps the code flow into the following indented block.
To help text editors/IDEs, they can automatically indent the next line if the previous line ended with a colon.
To make parsing by python slightly easier.
As far as I know, it's an intentional design to make it more obvious, that the reader should expect an indentation after the colon.
It also makes constructs like this possible:
if expression: action()
code_continues()
since having the code for the if immediately following the colon makes it possible for the compiler to understand that the next line should not be indented.
According to Guido Van Rossum, the Python inventor, the idea of using a colon to make the structure more apparent is inspired by earlier experiments with a Python predecessor, ABC language, which also targeted the beginners. Apparently, on their early tests, beginner learners progressed faster with colon than without it. Read the whole story at Guido's post python history blog.
http://python-history.blogspot.com/2009/02/early-language-design-and-development.html
And yes, the colon is useful in one-liners and is less annoying than the semicolon. Also style guide for long time recommended break on several lines only when it ends with a binary operator
x = (23 +
24 +
33)
Addition of colon made compound statement look the same way for greater style uniformity.
There is a 'colonless' encoding for CPython as well as colon-less dialect, called cobra. Those did not pick up.
What is the purpose of the colon before a block in Python?
Example:
if n == 0:
print "The end"
The colon is there to declare the start of an indented block.
Technically, it's not necessary; you could just indent and de-indent when the block is done. However, based on the Python koan “explicit is better than implicit” (EIBTI), I believe that Guido deliberately made the colon obligatory, so any statement that should be followed by indented code ends in a colon. (It also allows one-liners if you continue after the colon, but this style is not in wide use.)
It also makes the work of syntax-aware auto-indenting editors easier, which also counted in the decision.
This question turns out to be a Python FAQ, and I found one of its answers by Guido here:
Why are colons required for the if/while/def/class statements?
The colon is required primarily to enhance readability (one of the results of the experimental ABC language). Consider this:
if a == b
print a
versus
if a == b:
print a
Notice how the second one is slightly easier to read. Notice further how a colon sets off the example in this FAQ answer; it’s a standard usage in English.
Another minor reason is that the colon makes it easier for editors with syntax highlighting; they can look for colons to decide when indentation needs to be increased instead of having to do a more elaborate parsing of the program text.
Consider the following list of things to buy from the grocery store, written in Pewprikanese.
pewkah
lalala
chunkykachoo
pewpewpew
skunkybacon
When I read that, I'm confused, Are chunkykachoo and pewpewpew a kind of lalala? Or what if chunkykachoo and pewpewpew are indented just because they are special items?
Now see what happens when my Pewprikanese friend add a colon to help me parse the list better: (<-- like this)
pewkah
lalala: (<-- see this colon)
chunkykachoo
pewpewpew
skunkybacon
Now it's clear that chunkykachoo and pewpewpew are a kind of lalala.
Let's say there is a person who's starting to learn Python, which happens to be her first programming language to learn. Without colons, there's a considerable probability that she's going to keep thinking "this lines are indented because this lines are like special items.", and it could take a while to realize that that's not the best way to think about indentation.
Three reasons:
To increase readability. The colon helps the code flow into the following indented block.
To help text editors/IDEs, they can automatically indent the next line if the previous line ended with a colon.
To make parsing by python slightly easier.
As far as I know, it's an intentional design to make it more obvious, that the reader should expect an indentation after the colon.
It also makes constructs like this possible:
if expression: action()
code_continues()
since having the code for the if immediately following the colon makes it possible for the compiler to understand that the next line should not be indented.
According to Guido Van Rossum, the Python inventor, the idea of using a colon to make the structure more apparent is inspired by earlier experiments with a Python predecessor, ABC language, which also targeted the beginners. Apparently, on their early tests, beginner learners progressed faster with colon than without it. Read the whole story at Guido's post python history blog.
http://python-history.blogspot.com/2009/02/early-language-design-and-development.html
And yes, the colon is useful in one-liners and is less annoying than the semicolon. Also style guide for long time recommended break on several lines only when it ends with a binary operator
x = (23 +
24 +
33)
Addition of colon made compound statement look the same way for greater style uniformity.
There is a 'colonless' encoding for CPython as well as colon-less dialect, called cobra. Those did not pick up.
Am I correct in thinking that that Python doesn't have a direct equivalent for Perl's __END__?
print "Perl...\n";
__END__
End of code. I can put anything I want here.
One thought that occurred to me was to use a triple-quoted string. Is there a better way to achieve this in Python?
print "Python..."
"""
End of code. I can put anything I want here.
"""
The __END__ block in perl dates from a time when programmers had to work with data from the outside world and liked to keep examples of it in the program itself.
Hard to imagine I know.
It was useful for example if you had a moving target like a hardware log file with mutating messages due to firmware updates where you wanted to compare old and new versions of the line or keep notes not strictly related to the programs operations ("Code seems slow on day x of month every month") or as mentioned above a reference set of data to run the program against. Telcos are an example of an industry where this was a frequent requirement.
Lastly Python's cult like restrictiveness seems to have a real and tiresome effect on the mindset of its advocates, if your only response to a question is "Why would you want to that when you could do X?" when X is not as useful please keep quiet++.
The triple-quote form you suggested will still create a python string, whereas Perl's parser simply ignores anything after __END__. You can't write:
"""
I can put anything in here...
Anything!
"""
import os
os.system("rm -rf /")
Comments are more suitable in my opinion.
#__END__
#Whatever I write here will be ignored
#Woohoo !
What you're asking for does not exist.
Proof: http://www.mail-archive.com/python-list#python.org/msg156396.html
A simple solution is to escape any " as \" and do a normal multi line string -- see official docs: http://docs.python.org/tutorial/introduction.html#strings
( Also, atexit doesn't work: http://www.mail-archive.com/python-list#python.org/msg156364.html )
Hm, what about sys.exit(0) ? (assuming you do import sys above it, of course)
As to why it would useful, sometimes I sit down to do a substantial rewrite of something and want to mark my "good up to this point" place.
By using sys.exit(0) in a temporary manner, I know nothing below that point will get executed, therefore if there's a problem (e.g., server error) I know it had to be above that point.
I like it slightly better than commenting out the rest of the file, just because there are more chances to make a mistake and uncomment something (stray key press at beginning of line), and also because it seems better to insert 1 line (which will later be removed), than to modify X-many lines which will then have to be un-modified later.
But yeah, this is splitting hairs; commenting works great too... assuming your editor supports easily commenting out a region, of course; if not, sys.exit(0) all the way!
I use __END__ all the time for multiples of the reasons given. I've been doing it for so long now that I put it (usually preceded by an exit('0');), along with BEGIN {} / END{} routines, in by force-of-habit. It is a shame that Python doesn't have an equivalent, but I just comment-out the lines at the bottom: extraneous, but that's about what you get with one way to rule them all languages.
Python does not have a direct equivalent to this.
Why do you want it? It doesn't sound like a really great thing to have when there are more consistent ways like putting the text at the end as comments (that's how we include arbitrary text in Python source files. Triple quoted strings are for making multi-line strings, not for non-code-related text.)
Your editor should be able to make using many lines of comments easy for you.