[9fans] Another acme question

[9fans] Another acme question

[hugo rivera]

Hi,
I am not really sure how can this be done, if at all.
Lets imagine I have a program in my path, that I want to execute from
acme, called New (yes, the same name as the acme's New command). How
do I execute it by middle clicking on it without acme thinking I am
refering to its own command and, therefore, creating a new window that
I never wanted?

--
Saludos

Hugo

Re: [9fans] Another acme question

[lucio]

> How
> do I execute it by middle clicking on it without acme thinking I am
> refering to its own command and, therefore, creating a new window that
> I never wanted?

You type /bin/New, instead?  It would work 99% of the time.

++L

Re: [9fans] Another acme question

[ron minnich]

On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 7:01 AM, hugo rivera <uair00@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> I am not really sure how can this be done, if at all.
> Lets imagine I have a program in my path, that I want to execute from
> acme, called New (yes, the same name as the acme's New command). How
> do I execute it by middle clicking on it without acme thinking I am
> refering to its own command and, therefore, creating a new window that
> I never wanted?

cave man approach:
cat > bin/rc/New
#!/bin/rc
date
\x04term% chmod +x bin/rc/New

in the Acme line
rc -c New

works fine for me.

The easier thing to do : don't create a command named New.

"doctor, it hurts when I do *this*"
"then don't do it"


ron

Re: [9fans] Another acme question

[ron minnich]

On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 7:16 AM,  <lucio@proxima.alt.za> wrote:

> You type /bin/New, instead?  It would work 99% of the time.

dang, what was I thinking. I am such a caveman. I'm going back to
reading entrails.

ron

Re: [9fans] Another acme question

[hugo rivera]

uh, obviously.
Sorry for the stupid question and the noise.

2009/2/18, lucio@proxima.alt.za <lucio@proxima.alt.za>:
> > How
>  > do I execute it by middle clicking on it without acme thinking I am
>  > refering to its own command and, therefore, creating a new window that
>  > I never wanted?
>
>
> You type /bin/New, instead?  It would work 99% of the time.
>
>  ++L
>
>
>




Hugo

Re: [9fans] Another acme question

[lucio]

> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 7:16 AM,  <lucio@proxima.alt.za> wrote:
>
>> You type /bin/New, instead?  It would work 99% of the time.
>
> dang, what was I thinking. I am such a caveman. I'm going back to
> reading entrails.
>
I do agree with you that making up commands to match acme's built-ins
is a sure-fire way of shooting yourself in the foot.  But I have
occasionally considered the possibility of a clash through no fault of
my own.  Can't think of an example, right now.

++L

Re: [9fans] Another acme question

[hugo rivera]

OK, thanks for the reply.

2009/6/26 roger peppe <rogpeppe@gmail.com>:
> 2009/6/26 hugo rivera <uair00@gmail.com>:
>> Hello,
>> I have another problem with acme.
>> Lets say I want to check the spelling in all the comments in a c file,
>> so I execute:
>> Edit ,x/\/\*.*\*\// > spell   (nevermind this doesn't work for more
>> than one line comments)
>> and nothing happens.
>
> this seems to be a bug in spell - it ignores a final line with no linefeed.
> this works ok:
> Edit ,x/\/\*.*\*\// > {cat; echo} | spell
>
> i've sometimes wondered if it'd be useful to have a variant on >
> that prints the output of the command prefixed by the address
> of the input (not that it would be particularly useful in this case, though,
> as the words are easily searchable). i never thought of a decent
> syntax for it though.
>
>



--
Hugo

Re: [9fans] Another acme question

[roger peppe]

2009/6/26 hugo rivera <uair00@gmail.com>:
> Hello,
> I have another problem with acme.
> Lets say I want to check the spelling in all the comments in a c file,
> so I execute:
> Edit ,x/\/\*.*\*\// > spell   (nevermind this doesn't work for more
> than one line comments)
> and nothing happens.

this seems to be a bug in spell - it ignores a final line with no linefeed.
this works ok:
Edit ,x/\/\*.*\*\// > {cat; echo} | spell

i've sometimes wondered if it'd be useful to have a variant on >
that prints the output of the command prefixed by the address
of the input (not that it would be particularly useful in this case, though,
as the words are easily searchable). i never thought of a decent
syntax for it though.

[9fans] Another acme question

[hugo rivera]

Hello,
I have another problem with acme.
Lets say I want to check the spelling in all the comments in a c file,
so I execute:
Edit ,x/\/\*.*\*\// > spell   (nevermind this doesn't work for more
than one line comments)
and nothing happens. This doesn't mean that my spelling is good, since
I saw some misspelled words that spell(1) recognizes if I
echo '/* mispelled cument */' | spell
However, the output of
Edit ,x/\/\*.*\*\// > cat
appears in the corresponding +Errors window. I also did a
Edit ,x/\/\*.*\*\// > {cat | spell}
and nothing happens either.
What am I missing?

--
Hugo