Operater optimization #26

shigma · 2018-11-10T11:19:01Z

Some of the changes are proposals and others are features.

[Adjustment] Add context declarations into expressions for supporting following condition:

entranceFunction = Module[{internalFunc},
    internalFunc[foo_] := bar;
    Return[doSomethingWith[internalFunc]];
]

[Chore] Delete unnecessary regex grouping and quotation marks.
[Feature] Support numbers with base, scientific notation, precision or accuracy. See here.

   11^^11.11`11*^11
(* ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ constant.numeric *)

[Adjustment] Display built_in_options with variable.parameter. I know this is not that accurate, but much better than variable.function. Any ideas for this scope are welcomed.
[Feature] Support shorthand syntax for Out.

  %%%
(*^^^ storage.type.Out *)
  %12
(*^^^ storage.type.Out *)

[Feature] Support operator for Power.
[Adjustment] Display & with variable.function instead of keyword.operator. I think this would be more appropriate.
[Break] Remove the rule below. I don't know what does a prefix have to do with "constant".

match: ((?:{{symbol}}`)*(\${{symbol}}))(?=\s*:?=)
scope: entity.name.constant.wolfram

[Feature] Support shorthand syntax for Infix.

  a ~ f ~ b ~ g ~ c
(*    ^ variable.function *)
(*            ^ variable.function *)

[Feature] Support operator for Definition and FullDefinition.
[Adjustment] Better display with specific functions, for example:

  Sum[x, {x, 1, 100}]
(*        ^ variable.parameter *)
  Map[func, list]
(*    ^^^^ variable.function *)
  TakeWhile[list, func]
(*                ^^^^ variable.function *)

These functions are currently listed as variables. With further development of branch new-build-system, we can easily generate them within lines of code.

also alias for Out (%)

batracos · 2018-11-13T10:00:28Z

WolframLanguage.sublime-syntax

@@ -278,8 +357,22 @@ contexts:
            - include: sequence
        - match: (?=[^\[])
          pop: true
-    - match: ((?:{{symbol}}`)*(\${{symbol}}))(?=\s*:?=)


This rule was here to add to the index global variable declarations

$GlobalValue = xxx;

But this rule was not grammatical. System global varibles are defined by "built-in" variables. General varibles begin with "$" are not necessarily a "constant".

batracos · 2018-11-13T10:00:50Z

WolframLanguage.sublime-syntax

    - include: expressions

  expressions:
+    - include: declarations


I am no sure we should index all the localized functions.

What does "index" mean?

From my perspective, "declarations" have no grammatical difference with other expressions and should not be ruled out.

batracos · 2018-11-13T10:24:57Z

WolframLanguage.sublime-syntax

@@ -90,14 +106,19 @@ contexts:
        pop: true

  literals:
-    - match: (?:\d+\.?|\.\d)\d*\`{0,2}
+    # numbers, with base, scientific notation, precision or accuracy
+    - match: ([0-9]+\^\^)?{{number}}(\`\`?({{number}})?)?(\*\^{{number}})?


The first {{number}} can contain letters to represent digits in bases higher than 10.
I was working on this syntax but we can do it here as well. This would be my proposal

Suggested change

- match: ([0-9]+\^\^)?{{number}}(\`\`?({{number}})?)?(\*\^{{number}})?

- match: |-

(?x)

(?:(\d+)(\^\^))

((?:[$[:alnum:]]+\.?|\.[$[:alnum:]])[$[:alnum:]]*)

(?:(\`\`?)({{number}})?)?

(?:(\*\^)([+-]?\d+))?

captures:

1: constant.numeric.base.wolfram

2: keyword.operator.base.wolfram

3: constant.numeric.wolfram

4: keyword.operator.precision.wolfram

5: constant.numeric.precision.wolfram

6: keyword.operator.exponent.wolfram

7: constant.numeric.exponent.wolfram

- match: |-

(?x)

({{number}})

(?:(\`\`?)({{number}})?)?

(?:(\*\^)([+-]?\d+))?

captures:

1: constant.numeric.wolfram

2: keyword.operator.precision.wolfram

3: constant.numeric.precision.wolfram

4: keyword.operator.exponent.wolfram

5: constant.numeric.exponent.wolfram

I know it does not distinguish between precision and accuracy but I did not want to explode the pattern even more.

And exponents can have a decimal point.

((?:[$[:alnum:]]+.?|.[$[:alnum:]])[$[:alnum:]]*)

What is $ for?

Also, I don't like the idea to treat ^^ and *^ as "operators". If they were operators, they should have precedence and expressions like 8 ^^ 10 should be right. But obviously not.

batracos · 2018-11-13T10:25:55Z

WolframLanguage.sublime-syntax

    - match: ((?:System`)?{{built_in_numeric_constants}})
      scope: constant.numeric.wolfram
    - match: ((?:System`)?{{built_in_constants}})
      scope: constant.language.wolfram
    - match: ((?:System`)?{{built_in_options}})
-      scope: variable.function.wolfram
+      scope: variable.parameter.wolfram


I know this is conceptually wrong but I think function was there to have the same colouring for all System symbols.

But built-in-constants are displayed as "constants".

WolframLanguage.sublime-syntax

shigma · 2018-11-15T17:37:00Z

Updates

Optimize number pattern, support scope names with base, precision, accuracy and exponent.

  11`
(*^^ constant.numeric *)
(*  ^ constant.numeric.precision *)
  11.`11
(*^^^ constant.numeric *)
(*   ^^^ constant.numeric.precision *)
  .11``
(*^^^ constant.numeric *)
(*   ^^ constant.numeric.accuracy *)
  11.11``
(*^^^^^ constant.numeric *)
(*     ^^ constant.numeric.accuracy *)
  11^^1a
(*^^^^ constant.numeric.base *)
(*    ^^ constant.numeric *)
  11.11*^-11
(*^^^^^ constant.numeric.wolfram *)
(*     ^^^^^ constant.numeric.exponent *)

Optimize parameter pattern, support scope names with blank, head and default (which has not been supported in the past).

  _.
(*^^ variable.parameter.default *)

  var_head
(*^^^^^^^^ meta.parameter *)
(*^^^ variable.parameter *)
(*   ^ variable.parameter.blank *)
(*    ^^^^ variable.parameter.head *)

  var__head : foo
(*          ^ meta.pattern keyword.operator.Optional *)

  var___head ? EvenQ
(*           ^ meta.pattern keyword.operator.PatternTest *)

  var: patt ? EvenQ : foo
(*^^^ variable.parameter *)
(*   ^ keyword.operator.Pattern *)
(*     ^^^^^^^^^^^^ meta.pattern *)
(*     ^^^^ variable.other*)
(*          ^ keyword.operator.PatternTest *)
(*            ^^^^^ variable.function *)
(*                  ^ keyword.operator.Optional *)
(*                    ^^^ variable.other *)

Remove function classifications, which will be discussed in another PR.
Add DynamicModule into scoping_functions.
Merge pattern-short into variables for better semantics.
Fix a pattern capture mistake.
Add some comments.

chere005 · 2019-06-27T04:18:50Z

Re 7 I would keep & an operator.. There's some good features in this PR, but a lot to go through all at once. Smaller PRs might make it easier to get things merged since we can't approve it until all changes are OK. I see good work on supporting : as Optional, I haven't had a chance to check this out and try it yet but does it work for recognizing foo : (_Integer | _String) as pattern? I'll try to look at this more carefully in the next couple weeks.

chere005 · 2019-06-27T04:27:40Z

I did install it to start looking at things actually... first issue:

If[rowStart > 1,
	rowList = Replace[rowList, x_Integer :> x - rowStart + 1, {1}];
];

chere005 · 2019-06-27T04:28:23Z

Another issue:

Module[{data, fileMode, dims, enc, dataStrm, ignoreEmptyLines, summary},

	(* Load LibraryLink functions *)
	If[!loadAdapter[],
		Return@CreateSVToolsException["AdapterNotLoaded"];
	];

	enc					= ValidateOption[True, SVGetDimensions, CharacterEncoding, Alternatives @@ Join[System`$CharacterEncodings, {None, Automatic, "UTF8ISOLatin1"}], opts];
	ignoreEmptyLines	= ValidateOption[True, SVGetDimensions, "IgnoreEmptyLines", True | False, opts];
	td					= ValidateOption[True, SVGetDimensions, "TextDelimiters", t_String /; 0 <= StringLength[t] <= 1, opts];
	summary				= ValidateOption[True, SVGetDimensions, "Summary", _?BooleanQ, opts];
]

chere005 · 2019-06-27T04:30:01Z

Re 7 I would keep & an operator.. There's some good features in this PR, but a lot to go through all at once. Smaller PRs might make it easier to get things merged since we can't approve it until all changes are OK. I see good work on supporting : as Optional, I haven't had a chance to check this out and try it yet but does it work for recognizing foo : (_Integer | _String) as pattern? I'll try to look at this more carefully in the next couple weeks.

I tested the : as pattern and it works

chere005 · 2019-06-27T04:33:17Z

This is causing MAJOR performance detriments on my machine. I couldn't even open a file with 10k+ lines of code, but when I switched to the plugin on master it loaded instantly.

shigma added 2 commits November 10, 2018 17:34

support baseform and scientific notations

81e5674

also alias for Out (%)

functional development

39c0611

shigma requested review from batracos and chere005 November 10, 2018 11:19

shigma added enhancement feature labels Nov 10, 2018

shigma added 2 commits November 10, 2018 19:23

update syntax test

8ec6079

support RightComposition in shorthand

c47e559

batracos reviewed Nov 13, 2018

View reviewed changes

shigma added 2 commits November 16, 2018 01:01

optimize number pattern

9afb0e9

remove function-related changes and optimize patterns

d4b04ff

shigma added 2 commits November 16, 2018 01:38

fix default

1c3b945

fix syntax tests

644b6c5

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Operater optimization #26

Operater optimization #26

shigma commented Nov 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading

batracos Nov 13, 2018

shigma Nov 15, 2018

batracos Nov 13, 2018

shigma Nov 15, 2018 •

edited

Loading

batracos Nov 13, 2018

shigma Nov 15, 2018

shigma Nov 15, 2018

shigma Nov 15, 2018 •

edited

Loading

batracos Nov 13, 2018

shigma Nov 15, 2018

shigma commented Nov 15, 2018 •

edited

Loading

chere005 commented Jun 27, 2019

chere005 commented Jun 27, 2019

chere005 commented Jun 27, 2019

chere005 commented Jun 27, 2019

chere005 commented Jun 27, 2019

-    - match: ([0-9]+\^\^)?{{number}}(\`\`?({{number}})?)?(\*\^{{number}})?
+    - match: |-
+        (?x)
+        (?:(\d+)(\^\^))
+        ((?:[$[:alnum:]]+\.?|\.[$[:alnum:]])[$[:alnum:]]*)
+        (?:(\`\`?)({{number}})?)?
+        (?:(\*\^)([+-]?\d+))?
+      captures:
+: constant.numeric.base.wolfram
+: keyword.operator.base.wolfram
+: constant.numeric.wolfram
+: keyword.operator.precision.wolfram
+: constant.numeric.precision.wolfram
+: keyword.operator.exponent.wolfram
+: constant.numeric.exponent.wolfram
+    - match: |-
+        (?x)
+        ({{number}})
+        (?:(\`\`?)({{number}})?)?
+        (?:(\*\^)([+-]?\d+))?
+      captures:
+: constant.numeric.wolfram
+: keyword.operator.precision.wolfram
+: constant.numeric.precision.wolfram
+: keyword.operator.exponent.wolfram
+: constant.numeric.exponent.wolfram

Operater optimization #26

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Operater optimization #26

Conversation

shigma commented Nov 10, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

shigma Nov 15, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

shigma Nov 15, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

shigma commented Nov 15, 2018 • edited Loading

Updates

chere005 commented Jun 27, 2019

chere005 commented Jun 27, 2019

chere005 commented Jun 27, 2019

chere005 commented Jun 27, 2019

chere005 commented Jun 27, 2019

shigma commented Nov 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading

shigma Nov 15, 2018 •

edited

Loading

shigma Nov 15, 2018 •

edited

Loading

shigma commented Nov 15, 2018 •

edited

Loading