HLint is a Haskell lint tool for making code more idiomatic. Is there something like it for Erlang?
There is a tool called "Tidier": http://tidier.softlab.ntua.gr/mediawiki/index.php/Main_Page, which is based on a simpler module called erl_tidy which is part of the syntax_tools library: http://www.erlang.org/doc/man/erl_tidy.html.
Tidier is used via a web interface, letting you choose interactively which changes you want it to perform. It can do some amazing things, and is a great tool for learning how to write idiomatic Erlang.
Yes there is. Its called erl_lint
There's now also elvis. Although it is not specifically a linter, it does check that Erlang code conforms to certain rules which can be configured.
Related
Is it possible to write macOS/Cocoa applications in Google Go?
Is there a Go-Obj-C bridge? (it seems to me that Obj-C dynamism would be a great fit for Golang's interfaces)
Can I at least link the two together and make them talk to each other via plain-old C functions?
CGo is what enables you to call C code.
See the CGo doc and the informative, official blog post on it.
There does not seem to be cocoa bindings/libraries yet, but you may want to check out the GTK package for reference.
Right now there doesn't seem to be a package for binding Cocoa to Go. Cocoa is written in Objective-C which is a superset of C. Objective-C messages are (or at least used to be, not sure about the modern compilers) translated to C function calls by the compiler, to something like this:
objc_msgSend(object, sel_getUid("foo:bar:err:"), var, var2, errVar);
So it's definitely possible to use Cocoa from Go.
If you run in to a problem where you find you would like to use Cocoa in a Go app, IMHO take a step back and think about the problem you're trying to solve. Cocoa makes heavy use of named parameters and methods can have quite long signatures. This works well in Objective-C but I doubt the code would look as good in Go. On the other hand, Go solves another set of problems. Maybe writing a library (application logic) in Go and GUI code in Objective-C/Cocoa would do the trick?
TL;DR: How about writing model in Go and GUI code in Objective-C?
You can have a look at my blog post as an example. I'm afraid I didn't keep working on it, but here's the source code that can help you setting up a bare Cocoa/ObjC/Go project.
You're gonna be able to do something like this, as mentioned in the README.
package main
import (
"github.com/alediaferia/gogoa"
)
func main() {
app := gogoa.SharedApplication()
window := gogoa.NewWindow(0, 0, 200, 200)
window.SetTitle("Gogoga!")
window.MakeKeyAndOrderFront()
app.Run()
}
Does a refactoring (able do conscious language-aware rename classes/variables renaming and replace simple constructions instead of doing dumb string search-and-replace) tool exist which can be used without IDE/editor?
I am particularly interested in Scala, C# and PHP languages.
For Scala there is a refactoring library that can be used standalone: http://scala-refactoring.org/
Not exactly what you are looking for, but Bicycle Repair Man, a Python refactoring tool, ships as an editor-agnostic refactoring library. It's actually used via editor/IDE plugins though.
Is there a way to make emacs pull autocompletions of ruby methods the way Eclipse and NetBeans do? That is if I type File. and press CTRL-space in Eclipse I will get a list of File methods. Same with variables. I have installed autocomplete plugin, ruby-mode, rinari and cedet, but so far it will complete local variable and method names, but will not native ones.
I think you need something like RSense. You might also like the more general auto complete mode.
I'm not familiar with ruby, but if by "native methods" you mean stuff in some system library, there are a couple options for extending CEDET to do the work.
If there are ruby files somewhere that have all that code in them, and if ruby supports some sort of "include" or "import" statement, then you need to add that location to the include path for ruby. This probably requires a change the the ruby source code to add a new system include path. You can see examples in semantic-c.el. You may also need to override the function semantic-tag-include-filename to convert the include into a findable filename.
If there are no includes, and there is just some ruby interpreter that knows all this stuff, then you will instead need to code up a full ruby "omniscient" database, similar to semanticdb-el.el. It will need a way to query ruby for various things and return them as answers.
Any such enhancements would be welcome back in the ruby support in CEDET's contrib area.
Ruby is an interpreted language, making it difficult to do certain things, such as autocompletion. How would you know what the object type is, if it's not defined? Therefore, premade solutions are limited or nonexistent. Even the autocompletion in Netbean/Eclipse will only work on class methods (if I'm not mistaken).
In Java when you compile a .java file which defines a class, it creates a .class file. If you provide these class files to your coworkers then they cannot modify your source. You can also bundle all of these class files into a jar file to package it up more neatly and distribute it as a single library.
Does Ruby have any features like these when you want to share your functionality with your coworkers but you don't want them to be able to modify the source (unless they ask you for the actual .rb source file and tell you that they want to change it)?
I believe the feature you are looking for is called "trust" (and a source code control repository). Ruby isn't compiled in the same way that Java is, so no you can't do this.
I have to say your are in a rough position, not wanting to share code with a coworker. However, given that this is an unassailable constraint perhaps you could change the nature of the problem.
If you have a coworker that needs access to some service provided by a library of yours, perhaps you could expose it by providing a web/rest service instead of as a .rb file.
This way you can hide your code behind a web server, and if there is a network architecture that allows for low latency making these service calls, you can effectively achive the same goal.
Trust is a lot easier though.
edit:
Just saw this on HN: http://blog.astrails.com/2009/5/12/ruby-http-require, allows a ruby file to include another file through http instead of the filesystem.
Ruby is
A dynamic, interpreted, open source programming language with a focus on simplicity and productivity.
So like all interpreted languages, you need to give the source code to anyone who want's to execute your program/script.
By the way searching "compiled ruby" on google returned quiet a few results.
I don't think there is one. Ruby is purely an interpreted language, which means ruby interprets your source code directly in order to run it. Java is compiled, so there's an intermediate bytecode (the .class). You can obfuscate your ruby if you really wish, but it's probably more trouble than it's worth.
Just to make sure you realize, however, upwards of 95% of Java can be decompiled back into source using various free utilities, so in reality, Java's compilation isn't much better than distributing Ruby source.
This is not a language specific problem and one that can be managed more effectively through source control software.
There is a library called ruby2c that compiles a subset of Ruby into C code (which you can then compile into native code, if you want).
It was actually originally written as a Ruby code obfuscator (but has since been used for lots of other stuff, including Ruby Arduino development).
We have a proprietry system that we develop scripting code in.
We currently do not have a developer environment (apart from Notepad++) and cannot debug or compile this code. We have to submit it to the vendor to insert the code into the test or live system.
The language is essentially C like and has the same syntax.
Basically we want a tool to be able to simply check the syntax of chunks of code we send to the vendor.
Does a tool exist that will do this for me?
You write code in a proprietary scripting language, so you require syntax checking because you cannot compile or debug the code onsite? I'd suggest getting a copy of the language reference (including the BNF if possible) from your vendor, get a compiler-compiler like Coco/R (http://www.ssw.uni-linz.ac.at/coco/), and build yourself a quick and dirty compiler that just validates the abstract syntax tree.
That is to say, yes, there are tools you can use, though perhaps they involve more work than what you may have hoped.
If it's really the same syntax as C you can use a C compiler. Usually there's a syntax check only option (/Zs for MSVC).
I'm not sure how many problems you'll run into since C compilers are pretty picky, and being "like C" is not the same as being C.
It does seem odd that you're being asked to develop code without having any capability to run or even compile it. Kind of like writing a book without being able to proof read it before publishing. I have a hard time getting even "Hello World" programs to compile & run without some sort of goof-up on the very first go.