I am using Vim with neocomplcache plugin, its feature of usage prompt while completion confused me so much.
It behaved like this: I typed <C-X><C-U> when the cursor was at the end of os.path., then not only completion candidates was listed under the line, but also a horizontal split
which contained docstring of the first candidate appeared
at the top. My question is: how to get rid of this feature so that I only get code completion without the usage prompt?
It's all because preview is in completeopt by default, you can see its value by type
command :set completeopt and the result should be completeopt=menu,preview.
What we need is just menu, so cut the preview, add this line in your vimrc:
set completeopt-=preview
vim help reference:
*'completeopt'* *'cot'*
'completeopt' 'cot' string (default: "menu,preview")
global
{not available when compiled without the
|+insert_expand| feature}
{not in Vi}
A comma separated list of options for Insert mode completion
|ins-completion|. The supported values are:
menu Use a popup menu to show the possible completions. The
menu is only shown when there is more than one match and
sufficient colors are available. |ins-completion-menu|
menuone Use the popup menu also when there is only one match.
Useful when there is additional information about the
match, e.g., what file it comes from.
longest Only insert the longest common text of the matches. If
the menu is displayed you can use CTRL-L to add more
characters. Whether case is ignored depends on the kind
of completion. For buffer text the 'ignorecase' option is
used.
preview Show extra information about the currently selected
completion in the preview window. Only works in
combination with "menu" or "menuone".
Related
I am using a .pylintrc in my project root directory to control the PyLint messages I get when I run it on my project.
There are many options in pylintrc that take a comma separated list of values. For example:
[MASTER]
disable=relative-import,invalid-name,missing-docstring
In my actual pylintrc, this list of values can be quite long. Is there a way to specify such values, one on each line?
This did not work:
disable=relative-import,\
invalid-name,\
missing-docstring
This did not work either:
disable=relative-import
disable+=invalid-name
disable+=missing-docstring
To specify a disable across several lines, use the following:
disable=relative-import,
invalid-name,
missing-docstring
That is:
no continuation character \; and
indent the subsequent lines.
Em, you can add your config line by line, I'm use it in my project.
pylint explain the keyword disable as:
# Disable the message, report, category or checker with the given id(s). You
# can either give multiple identifiers separated by comma (,) or put this
# option multiple times (only on the command line, not in the configuration
# file where it should appear only once).You can also use "--disable=all" to
# disable everything first and then reenable specific checks. For example, if
# you want to run only the similarities checker, you can use "--disable=all
# --enable=similarities". If you want to run only the classes checker, but have
# no Warning level messages displayed, use"--disable=all --enable=classes
# --disable=W"
if you can disable others, for example, im my project, pylint give me this informations,
C0116: Missing function or method docstring (missing-function-docstring)
R0201: Method could be a function (no-self-use)
R1705: Unnecessary "elif" after "return" (no-else-return)
but i want ignore three message, so i add them in disable tags, like this
disable=unnecessary-lambda,
no-else-return,
too-many-branches
then pylint dont't report hte three message
What advantages and/or disadvantages are there to using a "snippets" plugin, e.g. snipmate, ultisnips, for VIM as opposed to simply using the builtin "abbreviations" functionality?
Are there specific use-cases where declaring iabbr, cabbr, etc. lack some major features that the snippets plugins provide? I've been unsuccessful in finding a thorough comparison between these two "features" and their respective implementations.
As #peter-rincker pointed out in a comment:
It should be noted that abbreviations can execute code as well. Often via <c-r>= or via an expression abbreviation (<expr>). Example which expands ## to the current file's path: :iabbrev ## <c-r>=expand('%:p')<cr>
As an example for python, let's compare a snipmate snippet and an abbrev in Vim for inserting lines for class declaration.
Snipmate
# New Class
snippet cl
class ${1:ClassName}(${2:object}):
"""${3:docstring for $1}"""
def __init__(self, ${4:arg}):
${5:super($1, self).__init__()}
self.$4 = $4
${6}
Vimscript
au FileType python :iabbr cl class ClassName(object):<CR><Tab>"""docstring for ClassName"""<CR>def __init__(self, arg):<CR><Tab>super(ClassName, self).__init__()<CR>self.arg = arg
Am I missing some fundamental functionality of "snippets" or am I correct in assuming they are overkill for the most part, when Vim's abbr and :help template templates are able to do all most of the stuff snippets do?
I assume it's easier to implement snippets, and they provide additional aesthetic/visual features. For instance, if I use abbr in Vim and other plugins for running/testing python code inside vim--e.g. syntastic, pytest, ropevim, pep8, etc--am I missing out on some key features that snippets provide?
Everything that can be done with snippets can be done with abbreviations and vice-versa. You can have (mirrored or not) placeholders with abbreviations, you can have context-sensitive snippets.
There are two important differences:
Abbreviations are triggered when the abbreviation text has been typed, and a non word character (or esc) is hit. Snippets are triggered on demand, and shortcuts are possible (no need to type while + tab. w + tab may be enough).
It's much more easier to define new snippets (or to maintain old ones) than to define abbreviations. With abbreviations, a lot of boiler plate code is required when we want to do neat things.
There are a few other differences. For instance, abbreviations are always triggered everywhere. And seeing for expanded into for(placeholder) {\n} within a comment or a string context is certainly not what the end-user expects. With snippets, this is not a problem any more: we can expect the end-user to know what's he's doing when he asks to expand a snippet. Still, we can propose context-aware snippets that expand throw into #throw {domain::exception} {explanation} within a comment, or into throw domain::exception({message}); elsewhere.
Snippets
Rough superset of Vim's native abbreviations. Here are the highlights:
Only trigger on key press
Uses placeholders which a user can jump between
Exist only for insert mode
Dynamic expansions
Abbreviations
Great for common typos and small snippets.
Native to Vim so no need for plugins
Typically expand on whitespace or <c-]>
Some special rules on trigger text (See :h abbreviations)
Can be used in command mode via :cabbrev (often used to create command aliases)
No placeholders
Dynamic expansions
Conclusion
For the most part snippets are more powerful and provide many features that other editors enjoy, but you can use both and many people do. Abbreviations enjoy the benefit of being native which can be useful for remote environments. Abbreviations also enjoy another clear advantage which is can be used in command mode.
Snippets are more powerful.
Depending on the implementation, snippets can let you change (or accept defaults for) multiple placeholders and can even execute code when the snippet is expanded.
For example with ultisnips, you can have it execute shell commands, vimscript but also Python code.
An (ultisnips) example:
snippet hdr "General file header" b
# file: `!v expand('%:t')`
# vim:fileencoding=utf-8:ft=`!v &filetype`
# ${1}
#
# Author: ${2:J. Doe} ${3:<jdoe#gmail.com>}
# Created: `!v strftime("%F %T %z")`
# Last modified: `!v strftime("%F %T %z")`
endsnippet
This presents you with three placeholders to fill in (it gives default values for two of them), and sets the filename, filetype and current date and time.
After the word "snippet", the start line contains three items;
the trigger string,
a description and
options for the snippet.
Personally I mostly use the b option where the snippet is expanded at the beginning of a line and the w option that expands the snippet if the trigger string starts at the beginning of a word.
Note that you have to type the trigger string and then input a key or key combination that actually triggers the expansion. So a snippet is not expanded unless you want it to.
Additionally, snippets can be specialized by filetype. Suppose you want to define four levels of headings, h1 .. h4. You can have the same name expand differently between e.g. an HTML, markdown, LaTeX or restructuredtext file.
snippets are like the built-in :abbreviate on steroids, usually with:
parameter insertions: You can insert (type or select) text fragments in various places inside the snippet. An abbreviation just expands once.
mirroring: Parameters may be repeated (maybe even in transformed fashion) elsewhere in the snippet, usually updated as you type.
multiple stops inside: You can jump from one point to another within the snippet, sometimes even recursively expand snippets within one.
There are three things to evaluate in a snippet plugin: First, the features of the snippet engine itself, second, the quality and breadth of snippets provided by the author or others; third, how easy it is to add new snippets.
I'm having a small aesthetic problem with sphinx, I want "--" to appear in the document, but it keeps coming out as "-".
Example source:
remove_user (--id|--username|--email) <user_id> <source_account>
---------------
**To remove a User (and any devices associated with them) from a specific account, the following command can be used:**
* pcli.py remove_user (--id|--username|--email) <user_id> <source_account>
How it looks:
Basically it's due to the html_use_smartypants option which is turned on by default (see doc). In your case you would want to turn it off.
In conf.py, find the line
#html_use_smartypants = True
And change it to
html_use_smartypants = False
EDIT:
html_use_smartypants has been deprecated and smartquotes should be used instead.
I'm building a piece of educational software and I have pseudocode on the output where I would like to highlight a specific line of code depending on which piece of code is running.
First round()
.....
--> highlight this line and the next after it moves
Output: First round has just started
The furthest I got was doing some bash highlighting but that required me to print out the line twice. Once in black and second in a different colour. Any suggestions on how to highlight a specific line? Any help is appreciated.
EDIT: I'm using Pyqt as my GUI toolkit so my output will be displayed in a textbox
You have to get the QTextBlock object that correspond to the line (*) you want to highlight or unhighlight and use a QTextCursor to change the format of that line:
def setLineFormat(self, lineNumber, format):
cursor = QTextCursor(self.textEdit.document().findBlockByNumber(lineNumber))
cursor.setBlockFormat(format)
# with
format = QTextBlockFormat()
format.setBackground(Qt.yellow)
# or
format.clearBackground()
If you are using QSyntaxHighlighter, you could also store the state of the line in the QTextBlock with QTextBlock.setUserState() or setUserData, handle that state in the QSyntaxHighlighter.highlightBlock() method as part of the syntax highlighting, and force the previous and the current lines to be repainted with QSyntaxHighlighter.rehighlightBlock().
*: lines==blocks unless you use a custom document layout
I am trying to get Vim to syntax highlight any file that ends with extension .Rtex in the following way:
All top level text is highlighted as TeX
Exception: any text enclosed in \begin{python}...\end{python} is highlighted as Python
I am able to achieve each of these criteria individually, but unable to achieve both simultaneously. I think that somehow the TeX highlighting overrides my Python-highlighted regions, or prevents them from taking effect, and I am stuck trying to figure out how.
First step: edit .vimrc to give files with extension .Rtex the filetype rtex:
au BufRead *.Rtex setf rtex
Second step: create ~/.vim/syntax/rtex.vim. It is the contents of this file that will determine how to highlight .Rtex files.
Third step: enable general top-level TeX highlighting, by making rtex.vim look like this:
runtime! syntax/tex.vim
If I now open a .Rtex file, the entire file is highlighted as TeX, including any text within \begin{python}...\end{python}, as expected.
Fourth step: follow the instructions in Vim's :help syn-include to include python highlighting and apply it to all regions delimited by \begin{python} and \end{python}. My rtex.vim file now looks like this:
runtime! syntax/tex.vim
unlet! b:current_syntax
syntax include #Python syntax/python.vim
syntax region pythonCode start="\\begin{python}" end="\\end{python}" contains=#Python
The unlet! b:current_syntax command is meant to force the python.vim syntax file to execute even though an existing syntax (TeX) is already active.
Problem: If I now open a .Rtex file, the entire file is still highlighted only as TeX. The \begin{python}...\end{python} region seems to have no effect.
Experiment: If I remove or comment out the runtime! command, I do get python highlighting, within the \begin{python}...\end{python} regions, exactly as desired, but of course no TeX highlighting in the remainder of the document. I therefore conclude that the TeX highlighting is somehow responsible for preventing the python regions from taking effect.
Can a Master of Vim offer me any suggestions? I am currently stumped. I have looked at several pages and stackoverflow questions that seem relevant, but none of them have so far led to a solution:
http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/Different_syntax_highlighting_within_regions_of_a_file
Embedded syntax highligting in Vim
VIM syntax highlighting of html nested in yaml
After some more study of the manual, and much more trial and error, I have finally answered my own question (a simultaneously embarrassing and sublime accomplishment), which I now preserve here for posterity.
Basically, I think the problem is that the python highlighting wouldn't take effect because the pythonCode region was itself contained in a region or highlight group defined by tex.vim, so it wasn't top-level. The solution is to also include (rather than just runtime) tex.vim, giving it a name like #TeX, and then add containedin=#TeX to my python region definition. So syntax/rtex.vim now looks like this:
let b:current_syntax = ''
unlet b:current_syntax
runtime! syntax/tex.vim
let b:current_syntax = ''
unlet b:current_syntax
syntax include #TeX syntax/tex.vim
let b:current_syntax = ''
unlet b:current_syntax
syntax include #Python syntax/python.vim
syntax region pythonCode matchgroup=Snip start="\\begin{python}" end="\\end{python}" containedin=#TeX contains=#Python
hi link Snip SpecialComment
let b:current_syntax = 'rtex'
And this works! I'm not sure if all of those unlet b:current_syntax commands are strictly necessary. I also gave the python region delimiters a matchgroup (Snip) so that they can be highlighted themselves (with the SpecialComment color), rather than left just plain, which is apparently what happens by default, since they are no longer considered part of the TeX.
Now it is a trivial thing to add more highlight regions for different languages (e.g., \begin{Scode}...\end{Scode}), which is great if you're getting into literate programming -- the original motivation for my question.
Edit: here is a screenshot showing how it works with Python and R code embedded in a TeX document:
I don't know if it helps, but a hack I use with my Rnw files that use both tex and rnoweb features is as follows:
au BufEnter *.Rnw set filetype=tex | set filetype=rnoweb
Would an adapted version work in your case?