search for: backticked

I'm using Michel Fortin's MDTest cases to rewrite my html2text.php script. Just now I stumbled upon this bug (in PHP Markdown at least): # Input: Backtick: ``\``` # Output: <p>Backtick: ``&#96;``</p> # Should-Be Output: <p>Backtick: <code>`</code></p> If you (Michel) are already aware of this, just ignore me ;-) -- Milian Wolff

I am doing unit-tests for Maruku and every once in a while I run into some doubts. I am posting a lot to the list, but all of these messages should be in-topic (tell me if not). Consider the input: --- `There is a literal backtick (\`) here.` `There is a literal backtick (\\`) here.` ``There is a literal backtick (`) here.`` --- The documentation says that line 2 and 3 are equivalent.

I noticed just now that package.skeleton() produces R files in which the function names are escaped with backticks. ?Quotes says that "The preferred quote is the backtick (`)", but I don't understand _why_ this is preferred. ?formula gives some clues but points out that there are no guarantees that formulae using non-syntactic names such as `like this` will be accepted. What

Hopefully the subject line didn''t scare you. That said... I have a simple polymorphic relationship (is that possible?): class Part has_many :attachments, :as => :attachable end class Attachment belongs_to :attachable, :polymorphic => true end Calling Part.find(:first).attachments yields this SQL error: ActiveRecord::StatementInvalid: Mysql::Error: Unknown column

I just noticed the following in update.formula and I'm wondering if this behavior is the intention of the developers. Here's an example: update(`a: b` ~ x, ~ . + y) Note now that the response has no backticks and is interpreted as a:b (i.e. ":" is now an operator). This is because in update.formula the call to terms.formula uses simplify = TRUE. I'm working with data that

Dear all, I just noticed, that prompt () looses backticks that protect default arguments: f <- function (FUN = `*`) {} cat (prompt (f, NA)$usage) yields: \usage{ f(FUN = *) } %- maybe also 'usage' for other objects documented here. without the backticks, which is of course found by R CMD check as syntax error. While this is easily fixed if the .Rd is further edited manually, I

Consider: x <- list(`a b` = 1) x$a<tab> (i.e., press the 'tab' key after typing 'x$a') The auto-complete mechanism will fill the buffer like so: x$a b This is not particularly helpful because this is now a syntax error. It seems to me there's a simple fix -- in utils:::specialCompletions(), we can wrap the result of utils:::specialOpCompletionsHelper() with

Hi, I just tried to upgrade Nixpkgs to R 3.5.0, but unfortunately the new version fails its regression test suite. We configure the build using the flags "--without-recommended-packages", in case that's relevant. You can see a complete build log with all relevant information at [1]. Anyway, the test failures look like this: | make[3]: Entering directory

Great suggestion! I've started a patch: https://bugs.r-project.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18479 On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 1:56 AM Ivan Krylov <krylov.r00t at gmail.com> wrote: > > ? Wed, 1 Mar 2023 01:36:02 -0800 > Michael Chirico via R-devel <r-devel at r-project.org> ?????: > > > +comps[non_syntactic] <- paste0("`", comps[non_syntactic], "`") >

I can't escape backticks if on a line with other code: $ echo 'maybe use `fixed face` for `/path/to/file` by using \`back ticks\` around it' | /usr/pkg/bin/Markdown <p>maybe use <code>fixed face</code> for <code>/path/to/file</code> by using \<code>back ticks\</code> around it</p> and this is even more wrong: $ echo 'maybe use

On 23/04/2018 6:33 AM, Peter Simons wrote: > Hi, > > I just tried to upgrade Nixpkgs to R 3.5.0, but unfortunately the new > version fails its regression test suite. We configure the build using > the flags "--without-recommended-packages", in case that's relevant. You > can see a complete build log with all relevant information at [1]. > Anyway, the test

>>> I'm not sure the indentation feature is so useful. After all, you >>> can use the old syntax if you want indentation. What do you think? >> >> I'd prefer to keep it simple and leave out the indentation feature. I would also prefer to leave this out. >>> Perhaps an alternative would be to use ++++s instead of ~~~~s. >> Advantages: Not

The upgrade to Rails 1.1 hurt my ability to run tests because it generated the following MySQL error: Mysql::Error: You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near ''key ON config (key)'' at line 1: CREATE UNIQUE INDEX key ON config (key) I have a table called `config` with a column

I''m at a loss as what to look for... I can issue a command result = `some_os_command_string` on my dev system just fine in both a pur ruby test file, and from Rails in dev mode. When I push that code to my server, the backtick command doesn''t work. No failure message -- even if I wrap it in begin/rescue so I have no specific clues to work from. I can run that same back ticked

Hi folks, Yesterday I raised an issue about inconsistent preservation of whitespace<http://www.freewisdom.org/projects/python-markdown/Tickets/000087>in Python-Markdown. >>> import markdown >>> md = markdown.Markdown() >>> md.convert('Added `>>> ` to signify user input.') u'<p>Added

Hi, Is anyone still using backticks on 1.4? Or is there another way to pull a variable from a shell script into Asterisk 1.4? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20080218/bd9a92f8/attachment.htm

Dear R-helpers, I would like to change the default value of a functions that is call by a package. The function deparse() is called by a set of functions from a library and because I don't think is appropriate to change the library, I am trying to change the default value in deparse(). At the moment the only solution I have come across is to place a function in my working environment like

I have set up a simple test of a questionnaire; I have a set of questions which have a many to many relationship with a set of possible responses. I have it working so a user can set the range of responses for a given question, but when trying any of the CRUD operations on the responses side, I get a cryptic error, to which I see no reference to online. Thanks for any tips that may clear

Hi I am very new to puppet and wants to implement something like this in my puppet template (erb file) the logic i am trying to do is : sssd_count=`rpm -qa | grep ''sssd'' | wc -l` <% if sssd_count =2 -%> session optional sss.so <% else %> session optional pam_ldap.so <% end -%> but the backtick does not work.. or i am unable to store the

It seems that there are a few camps here: * The scp power users - this camp believes that scp supporting backtick notation is fine and that running arbitrary commands is a perfectly fine thing to do. * The restricted shell users - this camp believes that scp supporting backtick may not be the best, and there are various restricted shells which can prevent this. Power users may belong to this