I am working on a program which takes file/folder names as input. Currently when I try to run a file which has got foreign language character in its name it is replaced by a ? For each of its character. I am running my exe on command prompt so trying to run the particular file results in an error. When I am using DIR on command prompt it displays ? For each character of the file name. Is there any way to display the actual foreign language characters in command prompt as I believe that could be causing my exe not to work any of those files.
This is the text that I am trying to read - 科普書籍推展教案 which is being replaced by ? on the console.
The command prompt can only display characters in your current ACP. So, if you have files with names outside the ACP, you're going to see ?. You can use changecp to pick a different CP, but here is no code page for full Unicode in the DOS box.
Inside your code, you need to learn to use 'W' API to work with full unicode pathnames. The safest thing is to just #define _UNICODE and use it uniformly.
Related
I'm trying to write a program that fetches the name and contents of a text file (UTF-8).
I use
system("chcp 65001 > nul");
to be able to properly read foreign characters in the text and copy them to a string one character at a time. The characters get properly copied to the string.
I also want to get the name of the file which includes Turkish characters such as İ, Ö, Ç, Ü etc.
For this I use strcpy with dir->d_name
The issue is when I print them to the terminal text contents are fine but file name is missing afromentioned foreign characters.
"TRKE.txt" instead of "TÜRKÇE.txt"
I must be able to accurately compare the file contents with file name using strcmp but it's not possible since the name is missing characters.
Using
system("chcp 1254 > nul");
instead makes it possible to get the file name correctly but then the contents of the file are not represented correctly. Alternating between the two lines doesn't work since I need both to be working at the same time to use strcmp().
setlocale(LC_ALL, "Turkish");
doesn't fix it either. What do I do?
I'd like to create a diagnosis script and would like somehow to get all the variables the user inputs in a watch window to a script. How may i access the watch variables and manipulate them?
I tried with a DIALOG.view but that wastes too much time. There might be another trace command but I don't know it. Thank you!
Getting the content of open Var.Watch windows from script is not directly supported in TRACE32.
However you can do the following in you script
Redirect printing to a file PRinTer.FILE "~~~/winpage.txt" ASCIIE (of course you can choose any other filename instead of winpage.txt)
The window WinPAGE.List shows you all open child windows. With WinPrint.WinPAGE.List you can sent the list of all open windows to the file specified before (winpage.txt).
Now parse the content of winpage.txt for the names of the windows, which are a watch windows. The window names start by default with a capital 'W' followed by three decimal digits (but can also be totally different) and are then followed by the command (in round brackets) which was used to open the windows. Compare case insensitive!
The watch windows have a command which starts with:
B::Var.Watch
B::V.Watch
B::Var.W
B::V.W
Redirect printing to a new file e.g. PRinTer.OPEN "~~~/varwatch.txt" ASCIIE
Send the content of each open watch window to the file varwatch.txt with the command WinPRT <window name>. The relevant window names you've got from step 3. Execute WinPrt for each open watch window.
Close varwatch.txt with PRinTer.CLOSE
Now you should have the content of all open watch-windows in the file varwatch.txt.
Other idea:
Use command STOre "mywindows.cmm" Win to save commands to create all open windows to a script.
Parse this script for all lines starting with Var.Watch (or one of it's shorts forms) and the lines starting with Var.AddWatch (or one of it's shorts forms). Parse case insensitive!. The arguments followed by Var.Watch or Var.AddWatch are the variables currently shown in the watch windows.
I'm using a batch file to execute some adb commands. When trying to do a longpress of the power key I use the following line:
adb -s <ipaddress>:5555 shell input keyevent --longpress 26.
If I type this command into cmd, it works without a hitch. Running it from the batch file, however, results in a short press. I created a single line batch file, with the above command as the sole contents. When running the batch file (I just type the file name in cmd), the command is printed as:
adb -s <ipaddress>:5555 shell input keyevent -ΓÇôlongpress 26
Is there a setting I may have unknowingly enabled that is causing this, or do I need some sort of escape character?
I'm rather embarrassed that I came across a solution to my issue only a few minutes after posting this, but I figure I should share and not waste anyone's time.
I've replaced the second hyphen in my command with its own alt code (i.e. alt 45) and it is now interpreted correctly in the batch file. The line still reads:
adb -s <ipaddress>:5555 shell input keyevent --longpress 26
I don't understand why this works, and would appreciate it if someone would shed light on the subject.
Edit: Based off the recommendation of the comment below, I looked up the differences between encoding schemes. If I understand it correctly, when encoding in ASCII or ANSI, characters are limited to 7 bits of data. This will keep characters in the first 128 members of the ASCII table, so the alt codes I saw previously couldn't be generated.
I am searching for a highly stable way to feed text (output of a program) into vim through vimserver. Assume that I have started a (g)vim session with gvim --servername vim myfile. The file myfile contains a (unique) line OUT: which marks the position where the text should be pasted. I can straight forwardly achieve this from the commandline with vim --servername vim --remote-send ':%s/OUT:/TEXT\\rOUT:/<Enter>'. I can repeatedly feed more text using the same command. Inside a C-program I can execute it with system(). However TEXT which is dynamic and arbitrary (received as a stream in the C-program) needs to be passed on the command line and hence it needs to be escaped. Furthermore using the replacement command %s vim will jump to the position where TEXT is inserted. I would like to find a way to paste large chunks of arbitrary text seamlessly in vim. An idea is to have vim read from a posix pipe with :r pipe and to write the the string from within the C-program to the pipe. Ideally the solution would be such that I can continuously edit the same file manually without noting that output is added at OUT: as long as this location is outside the visible area.
The purpose of this text feed is to create a command line based front end for scripting languages. The blocks of input is entered manually by the user in a vim buffer and is being sent to the interpreter through a pipe using vim's :! [interpreter] command. The [interpreter] can of course write the output to stdout (preceded by the original lines of input) in which case the input line is replaced by input and output (to be distinguished using some leading key characters for instance). However commands might take a long time to produce the actual output while the user might want to continue editing the file. Therefore my idea is to have [interpreter] return OUT: immediately and to append subsequent lines of output in this place as they become available using vimserver. However the output must be inserted in a way which does not disturb or corrupt the edits possibly made by the user at the same time.
EDIT
The proposed solutions seem to work.
However there seem to be at least two caveats: * if I send text two or more times this way the `` part of the commands will not take me back to the original cursor position (if I do it just once still the markers are modified which may interrupt the user editing the file manually) * if the user opens a different buffer (e.g. the online help) the commands will fail (or maybe insert the text in the present buffer)
Any ideas?
EDIT: After actually trying, this should work for you:
vim --servername vim --remote-send \
":set cpo+=C<CR>/OUT:<CR>:i<CR>HELLO<CR>WORLD<CR>.<CR>\`\`"
As far as I can see, the only caveats would be the period on a single line, which would terminate :insert instead of being inserted, and <..> sequences that might be interpreted as keypresses. Also, need to replace any newlines in the text with <CR>. However, you have no worries about regular expressions getting muddled, the input is not the command line, the amount of escaping necessary is minimal, and the jumping is compensated for with the double backticks.
Check out :help 'cpoptions', :help :insert, and :help ''.
Instead of dealing with the escaping, I would rather use lower-level functions. Use let lnum = search('^OUT:$') to locate the marker line, and call setline(lnum, [text, 'OUT:']) to insert the text and the marker line again.
SITUATION:
My instructor for my micro-controller class refuses to save sample code to a text file and instead saves it to a word document file instead. When I open up the doc file and copy/paste the code into my IDE "CodeWarrior" it causes errors upon compile time.
I am having to rewrite all the code into a text editor and then copy/paste it into my IDE.
MY UNDERSTANDING:
I was told to always save code as a text file because when you save code as a word document file it will bring in unwanted characters when your copy/pasting the code into your IDE for compiling.
MY QUESTIONS TO YOU:
1.)
Can someone explain this dilemma to me so I can understand it better? I would like to present a better case next time when I receive errors and to also know more about what is happening.
2.)
Is it possible to write a script that will show me all the characters that are being copied and pasted into a file when the code is coming from a word document vs. a text file? In otherwords is there a program that will allow me to see what is going on between copying/pasting code from a word doc file versus a txt file?
Saving source code as a Word document is just silly. If your instructor is insisting on this, chances are no matter how well-reasoned and thorough your argument, they're not going to listen. They're beyond help.
However, to answer your questions: 1) It depends on what you're pasting the thing into. Programs that copy onto the clipboard usually make the data available in several different formats, ranging from their own internal format to plain ASCII text, to maximize compatibility so that the data can be pasted into pretty much any target program. Most text editors will only accept the plan-text version, in which case no extra characters should be transferred. However if your text editor supports RTF or HTML, this may not be true. I'm not sure what CodeWarrior supports but it is certainly possible.
A workaround if this is the case: First paste into a PURE text editor like Notepad. Then copy from Notepad into CodeWarrior. This should eliminate any hidden formatting. As shoover said above, make sure double-quotes " are really double-quotes and not the fancy left- and right-specific quotes that Word sometimes uses.
Use a hex editor like XVI32 to see the raw contents of the file, including nonprinting characters. Or use a text editor with support for showing nonprinting characters (vi/vim, etc.).
I'm studying C and I've just had the same problem. When coping a piece of code from a PDF file and trying to compiling it, gcc would return a serie of errors. Reading the answer above I had an idea: "What if I converted the utf8 into ascii?". Well, I found a website that does just that (https://onlineutf8tools.com/convert-utf8-to-ascii). But instead of also converting the utf8 characters into ascii, it showed them as hexadecimals (Copying from the website to the text editor you can see it better). From there i realised that the problem were mostly the quote marks "".
I then copied the ascii "translation" into my code editor (I must add that it worked fine with Sublime, while VScode read the same utf8 code as it was in the original file, even after cp from the website) and replaced all the hex with the actual ascii characters that were needed to compile the code properly. I used the function find and replace from my editor to do it. I must say that it wasn't very fast doing it. But I believe that in some cases, if the code you're trying to copying is too long, doing it the way I've just described could be faster than rewriting the entire code.