Re: LC Server: shebang breaks tags?
Monte Goulding wrote: >> On 11 Feb 2020, at 6:10 am, Richard Gaskin wrote: >> >> Can the merge function be extended to support scripts interleaved >> between blocks of non-code? >> >> e.g. this works in Server, and not in Merge: >> >> >> This is some non-code >> >> Some other non-code >> > > I suspect it could but might require merge to do two parses to execute > server style then execute merge style so in the end it might be better > to have a separate function. A way to just parse once and execute > multiple times like a regular script would be useful. Perhaps the > engine could maintain a stack of compiled server style scripts like it > does for regex. I’m not overly sure it adds a great deal to the > platform though. Probably use cases for this are better served my > multi-line string literals. Like heredoc? https://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=17471 -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Systems Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: LC Server: shebang breaks tags?
> On 11 Feb 2020, at 6:10 am, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode > wrote: > > Can the merge function be extended to support scripts interleaved between > blocks of non-code? > > e.g. this works in Server, and not in Merge: > > > This is some non-code > > Some other non-code > I suspect it could but might require merge to do two parses to execute server style then execute merge style so in the end it might be better to have a separate function. A way to just parse once and execute multiple times like a regular script would be useful. Perhaps the engine could maintain a stack of compiled server style scripts like it does for regex. I’m not overly sure it adds a great deal to the platform though. Probably use cases for this are better served my multi-line string literals. Cheers Monte ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: LC Server: shebang breaks tags?
Thanks, Monte. With your explanation that does make sense. I have plenty of options for doing what I need to do, so no worries on this, but it does leave me with one question: Can the merge function be extended to support scripts interleaved between blocks of non-code? e.g. this works in Server, and not in Merge: This is some non-code Some other non-code -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Systems Monte wrote: Hey guys! This is one of my early community contributions. The server has an in tag mode and a not in tag mode. The shebang both tells the OS where to find the executable to run the script and sets enters tag mode. So: #! /some/path put the long date && the long time ?>FooBar Should generate the same output as: FooBar You can see why this is necessary if you consider that you don’t want the engine to output the shebang line. Cheers ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: LC Server: shebang breaks tags?
i am using 2 scripts for that. Both have the same name but an other extension One .lc script which contains the complete script and has the tags and one shell script which always looks the same #! /some/path put the filename of me into tInclude replace ".sh" with ".lc" in tInclude include tInclude I just have to make sure, that both files have the same name prefix or however this would be called. This way i can run my scripts directly on shell and also from the browser if needed. - Matthias Rebbe Life Is Too Short For Boring Code > Am 08.02.2020 um 05:04 schrieb Richard Gaskin via use-livecode > : > > LC Server 6.6 and later allows you to use LC as you would other system > utility languages, by including the path to the engine on the first line > following a shebang - see discussion here: > https://livecode.com/livecode-server/ > > This lets us use the old MetaCard style with command line scripts, without > needing to put "" around the code. > > But oddly, it seems that running a script this way not only doesn't need to > comment wrappers, it actually tries to execute them - and of course fails. > > For example, this script: > >#! ./lcs > >put the long date && the long time >?> > > ...throws this error: > > row 3, col 1: script: not a command (<) > > > Weirder, I've found that if I omit the shebang and call the engine directly > in the path on the command line it runs well: > > ./lcs test.lc > > What is it about the shebang that's breaking execution in comment blocks? > > I have a need to embed code within larger blocks of non-code, and had > considered using LC Server as a helper app for that.* It doesn't matter much > to me if I launch it with the app path or not, but since most of my systems > have LC Server installed for general use it would be nice to use the shebang > method. So this seeming anomaly is certainly not critical, just odd. > > > > * Yes, I know I can use the merge function for this, but LC desktop's merge > is far more limited to the implicit merge that happens when using LC Server. > > The merge function doesn't continue code execution across blocks of code > separated by non-code, whereas LC Server does this well: > > >This is some non-code > >Some other non-code > > > Maybe we could have the desktop merge function expanded to work like Server's > implicit merge? That would be most awesome. > > -- > Richard Gaskin > Fourth World Systems > Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web > > ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com > > ___ > use-livecode mailing list > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription > preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: LC Server: shebang breaks tags?
Hey guys! This is one of my early community contributions. The server has an in tag mode and a not in tag mode. The shebang both tells the OS where to find the executable to run the script and sets enters tag mode. So: #! /some/path put the long date && the long time ?>FooBar Should generate the same output as: FooBar You can see why this is necessary if you consider that you don’t want the engine to output the shebang line. Cheers Monte ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: LC Server: shebang breaks tags?
Can’t answer regarding the design decision, but here is the pertinent line: One recent feature that was introduced in LiveCode 6.6 was the ability to use hashbangs (#! /path/to/livecode) in LiveCode server scripts instead of script open and close tags (). Of note is the “instead of” statement which leads me to believe that it was designed that way. It makes sense if trying to use it for automation since you don’t need the code tags. I would guess that a command line parameter could be added to have it work the other way. Thanks, Brian On Feb 7, 2020, 11:05 PM -0500, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode , wrote: > LC Server 6.6 and later allows you to use LC as you would other system > utility languages, by including the path to the engine on the first line > following a shebang - see discussion here: > https://livecode.com/livecode-server/ > > This lets us use the old MetaCard style with command line scripts, > without needing to put "" around the code. > > But oddly, it seems that running a script this way not only doesn't need > to comment wrappers, it actually tries to execute them - and of course > fails. > > For example, this script: > > #! ./lcs > > put the long date && the long time > ?> > > ...throws this error: > > row 3, col 1: script: not a command (<) > > > Weirder, I've found that if I omit the shebang and call the engine > directly in the path on the command line it runs well: > > ./lcs test.lc > > What is it about the shebang that's breaking execution in comment blocks? > > I have a need to embed code within larger blocks of non-code, and had > considered using LC Server as a helper app for that.* It doesn't matter > much to me if I launch it with the app path or not, but since most of my > systems have LC Server installed for general use it would be nice to use > the shebang method. So this seeming anomaly is certainly not critical, > just odd. > > > > * Yes, I know I can use the merge function for this, but LC desktop's > merge is far more limited to the implicit merge that happens when using > LC Server. > > The merge function doesn't continue code execution across blocks of code > separated by non-code, whereas LC Server does this well: > > > This is some non-code > > Some other non-code > > > Maybe we could have the desktop merge function expanded to work like > Server's implicit merge? That would be most awesome. > > -- > Richard Gaskin > Fourth World Systems > Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web > > ambassa...@fourthworld.com http://www.FourthWorld.com > > ___ > use-livecode mailing list > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription > preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
