I am writing lots of Sphinx/RestructuredText and this includes Sequence Diagrams using PlantUML. I have lots of text that I am reusing, so to make things cleaner, I created a definitions.iuml file. In this file, I can create named text references (via !startsub/!endsub blocks) that allows me to reference them in several different Sequence Diagrams. Change it once in the source location, and they all change. Perfect.
My problem is how to use these references outside of Sequence Diagrams? I use the exact same code (!includesub ../defintions.iuml!NAMED-REFERENCE) in the .rst file, and when I make docx/pdf, I see that link, I don't see the text that it is referencing. To make things worse, Google has like no documentation or search results on this. Queries of includesub, startsub, endsub +sphinx come back with nothing.
Help me obiwan kenobi.
I found the answer, which only resulted in more questions haha. Anyway, one thing at a time:
To create reference variables in your text document, use rst_prolog or rst_epilog in your Conf.py file. Why there are 2 commands that serve the same purpose, I dont know.
rst_prolog = """
.. |Variable1| replace:: Monday
.. |Variable2| replace:: Tuesday
"""
Now whenever you write |Variable1| in your text, the document will generate Monday.
The problem with the above is that its just for short words/phrases. You can't use it for code blocks, or anything that is more than one line. To reference in Code Blocks:
Create a new .rst file with the code you want to display. Best practice is to create a Code folder and place them all in there.
Further best practice is to stop using the '.. code block::' and instead use '.. parsed-literal::'. The output is the exact same, but parsed-literal allows you to use conf.py variables and ..codeblock:: doesn't.
So in this .rst file, first line is .. parsed-literal:: and all the text below it is the code you want to reference
In the original document that you wanted this code, type:
<4 spaces indent>.. include:: <Folder/File.rst>
Generate your document, and notice how the code is now being reference. You can include this reference all throughout your document.
I will soon be creating a new thread, this time asking how the text body and sequence diagrams can use the same reference. Currently, all text needs one reference, all sequences need another reference, and now we have double updates. Not ideal
Related
In markdown I can write:
[example1][myid]
[example2][myid]
[myid]: http://example.com
so I don't have to retype the full external link multiple times.
Is there an analogous feature in AsciiDoc? Specially interested in the Asciidoctor implementation.
So far I could only find:
internal cross references with <<>>
I think I saw a replacement feature of type :myid:, but I can't find it anymore. And I didn't see how to use different texts for each link however.
Probably you mean something like this:
Userguide Chapter 28.1. Setting configuration entries
...
Attribute entries promote clarity and eliminate repetition
URLs and file names in AsciiDoc3 macros are often quite long — they break paragraph flow and readability suffers. The problem is compounded by redundancy if the same name is used repeatedly. Attribute entries can be used to make your documents easier to read and write, here are some examples:
:1: http://freshmeat.net/projects/asciidoc3/
:homepage: http://asciidoc3.org[AsciiDoc3 home page]
:new: image:./images/smallnew.png[]
:footnote1: footnote:[A meaningless latin term]
Using previously defined attributes: See the {1}[Freshmeat summary]
or the {homepage} for something new {new}. Lorem ispum {footnote1}.
...
BTW, there is a 100% Python3 port available now: https://asciidoc3.org
I think you are looking for this (and both will work just fine),
https://www.google.com[Google]
or
link: https://google.com[Google]
Reference:
Ascii Doc User Manual Link
Update #1: Use of link along with variables in asciidoc
Declare variable
:url: https://www.google.com
Use variable feature using format mentioned above
Using ' Link with label '
{url}[Google]
Using a relative link
link:{url}[Google]
I've learnt that it's possible to maintain my documentation in a modular form with parts/chapters etc. across multiple files by using the include command.
The only problem with this approach is that it effectively concatenates all included files into one big file, which means that they are no longer treated as separate pages by the Sphinx Read The Docs theme.
As a consequence of this, the documentation has very long pages that users have to scroll down, rather than short pages with previous/next buttons for navigation. I would like my documentation to have the latter structure because I think that it creates a much more comfortable user experience.
How can I preserve part/chapter structure without creating a single, long, page?
Basing myself on the earlier question that you reference, I should warn you about the solution that is given there or more so about the question itself :-)
Your document did not reproduce the headings properly ("part" against "chapter") because the toctree directive considers the first heading in the included document as the "top heading" of that document. The other solution was to move the
######
Part 1
######
part in the main file, the one with the toctree directive.
######
Part 1
######
.. toctree::
:maxdepth: 2
test1
test2
I learned about this through experience. I cannot find a proper reference about this, though.
Is there a way to create links or anchors within SPSS syntax? Something like linking to a bookmark.
I am making changes and additions to a syntax file, and document these changes at the bottom of the file as comments. In these comments I would like to link to the part of the syntax that was changed. Now I just write the line number, but that changes as I add more syntax, so the reference becomes incorrect.
Bookmarks were the closest thing I found to what I want to do, but I can't turn them into a link. Moreover, I can only create a maximum of 9 bookmarks, which is not enough.
Trying to think creatively here:
instead of bookmarking all the changes, you could break up your syntax into many small syntaxes - each of which contains one of the parts where a change was made.
you can name and number the small syntaxes accordingly.
Then you create one syntax which contains a series of INSERT commands, which calls each of the small syntaxes in turn. You can add titles and remarks between the insert commands, so other users can follow the process and study the relevant small syntax that they need separately.
The Statistics Syntax Editor supports bookmarks - you can have up to 10. Generate a few in the SE and save the syntax file to see how these are represented (hint: look at the COMMENT BOOKMARK lines.
I have a large source code where most of the documentation and source code comments are in english. But one of the minor contributors wrote comments in a different language, spread in various places.
Is there a simple trick that will let me find them ? I imagine first a way to extract all comments from the code and generate a single text file (with possible source file / line number info), then pipe this through some language detection app.
If that matters, I'm on Linux and the current compiler on this project is CLang.
The only thing that comes to mind is to go through all of the code manually and check it yourself. If it's a similar language, that doesn't contain foreign letters, consider using something with a spellchecker. This way, the text that isn't recognized will get underlined, and easy to spot.
Other than that, I don't see an easy way to go through with this.
You could make a program, that reads the files and only prints the comments out to another output file, where you then spell check that file, but this would seem to be a waste of time, as you would easily be able to spot the comments yourself.
If you do make a program for that, however, keep in mind that there are three things to check for:
If comment starts with /*, make sure it stops reading when encountering */
If comment starts with //, only read one line - unless:
If line starting with // ends with \, read next line as well
While it is possible to detect a language from a string automatically, you need way more words than fit in a usual comment to do so.
Solution: Use your own eyes and your own brain...
I want to understand if code snippets are what I am looking for here.
I wind up writing the same line of code over and over during a refactoring.
Is there anyway I can create a shortcut that will spit out a line of code that I need?
Another easier option is to drag the code blocks that you re-use frequently onto the general tab of your toolbox area. You could even organize them with their own tab name and all.
alt text http://blogs.telerik.com/Libraries/MetaBlog/WindowsLiveWriter-VisualStudioTooltipsunpluggedDragandDro_EF10-generalTabDragged.sflb
Are you repeating the same line of code over and over on many different days?
Or are you encountering a situation where you have the same line to write many times as a part of a single task, but today's line of code will be different to tomorrows?
If you have the same line/block of code that you use often, a snippet is a good way to capture that in a reusable form (better, IMHO, than copy/paste because you can parameterise them).
However, if you're just looking for a quick way to repeat the same line that's come up now, check out Visual Studio's ability to record keystrokes.
Try this:
Put your cursor on a blank line inside a C# method.
Select Tools|Macros|Record Temporary Macro (often this is Control-Shift-R)
Type "example();" and press return
Select Tools|Macros|Stop Recording
You've just created a temporary macro that you can play back at any time - usually the keystroke for this is Control-Shift-P.
The key to this technique is that the macro records everything you do - with some practise, you can record edits to a line of code and repeat those edits on other lines.
I've used this in the past to create repetative code blocks - like assigning sets of properties from one object to another.
Depending on the code snippet, it would almost always be arguable that this line of code belongs in a util method, rather than copypasta.. But otherwise, yeah - a snippet is probably the best place.
Code Snippets sound like the right approach, although you could investigate Macros inside Visual Studio, which can be very powerful.
One advantage of a code snippet over adding it to the toolbox is that you can define the parts of the code that you want to change. I wrote a code snippet that generated something like the following code:
public class *className*Collection : List<*className*>
Where I only typed className once and it was automatically filled into the other parts.