I noticed that the syntax/php.vim file on my ubuntu machine has a php_htmlInStrings option. I can turn this option on to display HTML syntax highlighting within strings in my php files, which is great. I would also like to do javascript syntax highlighting within strings in a php file. Does anybody know if this can be done and if so how can I do it?
edited - added extra possibilities
I should also mention that I would be happy with a solution where i have to parse all my javascript strings though a php function before outputting the result. This might get around the problem suggested by conner below where vim has trouble deciding if the string contains javascript. for example:
$js = "some regular text which is not javascript##now vim has
detected that this part is javscript##back to regular text";
parse($js);
function parse($str)
{
return str_replace('##', '', $str);
}
The reason I would be happy to do this is because I will probably be incorporating a html/css/js variable minifier into my project which will be doing substitutions on strings anyway.
Of course if there is a vim-specific equivalent character for ## which will not show up in the source code and would not need to be filtered out then this would be preferable...
re-edit 2
As per conner's solution below, the desired effect can be achieved like so:
$js = "<script>some javascript</script>";
(with :let php_htmlInStrings=1 in vim). If somebody can show me the vim script required to get the javascript syntax highlighting to show up in the following string then I will award them the answer:
$js = /*<script>*/"some javascript"/*</script>*/;
I think the general problem with this is that vim needs a way to differentiate between the javascript and HTML highlighting. In HTML files, vim determines this based on the <script></script> tags within it to apply the javascript highlighting. If you put <script></script> tags in your string you'll see that this is the case. However, if you take those away then vim has no way of knowing if the content in your string is HTML or javascript. You could remedy this by editing adding something to signify that it's javascript that hopefully wouldn't effect the resultant code, but this is tricky. You can see where the HTML file is setting the <script></script> tag specification on line 167 of $VIMRUNTIME/syntax/html.vim. It looks like this:
syn region javaScript start=+<script[^>]*>+ keepend end=+</script>+me=s-1 contains=#htmlJavaScript,htmlCssStyleComment,htmlScriptTag,#htmlPreproc
Have you tried this php.vim syntax file?
Related
I need to remove the comment lines from my code.
preg_replace('!//(.*)!', '', $test);
It works fine. But it removes the website url also and left the url like http:
So to avoid this I put the same like preg_replace('![^:]//(.*)!', '', $test);
It's work fine. But the problem is if my code has the line like below
$code = 'something';// comment here
It will replace the comment line with the semicolon. that is after replace my above code would be
$code = 'something'
So it generates error.
I just need to delete the single line comments and the url should remain same.
Please help. Thanks in advance
try this
preg_replace('#(?<!http:)//.*#','',$test);
also read more about PCRE assertions http://cz.php.net/manual/en/regexp.reference.assertions.php
If you want to parse a PHP file, and manipulate the PHP code it contains, the best solution (even if a bit difficult) is to use the Tokenizer : it exists to allow manipulation of PHP code.
Working with regular expressions for such a thing is a bad idea...
For instance, you thought about http:// ; but what about strings that contain // ?
Like this one, for example :
$str = "this is // a test";
This can get complicated fast. There are more uses for // in strings. If you are parsing PHP code, I highly suggest you take a look at the PHP tokenizer. It's specifically designed to parse PHP code.
Question: Why are you trying to strip comments in the first place?
Edit: I see now you are trying to parse JavaScript, not PHP. So, why not use a javascript minifier instead? It will strip comments, whitespace and do a lot more to make your file as small as possible.
I am currently working on a replacement tool that will dynamically replace certain strings (including html) in a website using a smarty outputfilter.
For the replacement to take place, I am using PHP's str_ireplace method, which reads the code that is supposed to be replaced and the replacement code from a database, and then pass the result to the smarty output (using an output filter), in a similar way as the below.
$tpl_source = str_ireplace($replacements['sourceHTML'], $replacements['replacementHTML'], $tpl_source);
The problem is, that although it works great on my dev server, once uploaded to the live server replacements occasionally fail. The same replacements work just fine on my dev version though. After some examinations and googling there was not much I could find out regarding this issue. So my question is, what could influence str_replace's behavour?
Thanks
Edit with replacement example:
$htmlsource = file_get_contents('somefile.html');
$newstr = str_replace('Some text', 'sometext', $htmlsource); // the text to be replaced does exist in the html source
fails to replace. After some checking, it looks like the combination of "> creates a problem. But just the combination of it. If I try to change only (") it works, if I try to change only (>) it works.
It might be that special chars like umlauts do not display on the live server correctly and so str_replace() would fail, if there are specialchars inside the string you want to replace.
Is the input string identical on both systems? Have you verified this? Are you sure?
Things to check:
Are the HTML attributes in the same order?
Are the attribute values using the same kind quote marks? (eg <a href='#'> vs <a href="#">)
Is there any other stray HTML code getting in there?
Is the entity encoding the same? (eg vs - same character; different HTML)
Is the character-set the same? (eg utf-8 vs ISO 8859-1: Accented characters will be encoded differently)
Any of these things will affect the result and produce the failures you're describing.
This was a trikcy problem, and it ended up having nothing to do with the str_replace method itself;
We are using smarty as a tamplating system. The str_replace method was used by a smarty ouput filter in order to change the html in some ocassions, just before it was delivered to the user.
Here is the Smarty outputfilter Code:
function smarty_outputfilter_replace($tpl_source, &$smarty)
{
$replacements = Content::getReplacementsForPage();
if (is_array($replacements))
{
foreach ($replacements as $replacementData)
{
$tpl_source = str_replace($replacementData['sourcecode'], $replacementData['replacementcode'], $tpl_source);
}
}
return ($tpl_source);
}
So this code failed now and then for now apparent reason... until I realized that the HTML code in the smarty template was being manipulated by an Apache filter.
This resulted into the source code in the browser (which we were using as the code to be replaced by something else) not being identical to the template code (which smarty was trying to modify). Result? str_replace failed :)
I need to remove the comment lines from my code.
preg_replace('!//(.*)!', '', $test);
It works fine. But it removes the website url also and left the url like http:
So to avoid this I put the same like preg_replace('![^:]//(.*)!', '', $test);
It's work fine. But the problem is if my code has the line like below
$code = 'something';// comment here
It will replace the comment line with the semicolon. that is after replace my above code would be
$code = 'something'
So it generates error.
I just need to delete the single line comments and the url should remain same.
Please help. Thanks in advance
try this
preg_replace('#(?<!http:)//.*#','',$test);
also read more about PCRE assertions http://cz.php.net/manual/en/regexp.reference.assertions.php
If you want to parse a PHP file, and manipulate the PHP code it contains, the best solution (even if a bit difficult) is to use the Tokenizer : it exists to allow manipulation of PHP code.
Working with regular expressions for such a thing is a bad idea...
For instance, you thought about http:// ; but what about strings that contain // ?
Like this one, for example :
$str = "this is // a test";
This can get complicated fast. There are more uses for // in strings. If you are parsing PHP code, I highly suggest you take a look at the PHP tokenizer. It's specifically designed to parse PHP code.
Question: Why are you trying to strip comments in the first place?
Edit: I see now you are trying to parse JavaScript, not PHP. So, why not use a javascript minifier instead? It will strip comments, whitespace and do a lot more to make your file as small as possible.
Im trying to get GeSHi to work with markdown.
A simple use for Geshi is as follows:
$geshi = new GeSHi($message, 'c');
print $geshi->parse_code();
The above code takes in the whole of message and turns it into Highlighted code
I also have my Markdown Function
print Markdown($message);
I was trying to use call back function to preg_match the <pre> tags returned from markdown and run the geshi->parse_code(); function on the returned values
Here is my code
print preg_replace_callback(
'/<pre.*?>(.*?[<pre.*?>.*<\/pre>]*)<\/pre>/gism',
create_function(
// single quotes are essential here,
// or alternative escape all $ as \$
'$matches',
'$geshi = new GeSHi($matches[0], \'php\'); return $geshi->parse_code()'
),
Markdown($blog_res['message']));
Am i on the right track?
Is My Regex right? it works on http://gskinner.com/RegExr/
Thanks for the help
for future reference, you might want to check out my plugin for this:
https://github.com/drm/Markdown_Geshi
It is based on the regular markdown plugin adding a block marked with a shebang to highlight code, like this:
#!php
<?php print('This is PHP code'); ?>
Works pretty well and I use it on my own blog regularly.
it was the regex :(
instead of
/<pre.*?>(.*?[<pre.*?>.*<\/pre>]*)<\/pre>/gism
use (remove the global flag)
/<pre.*?>(.*?[<pre.*?>.*<\/pre>]*)<\/pre>/ism
But if you are using markdown, you have to remember to compensate for the code blocks that are on thier own therefore you need to replace only the ones that are in the format of <pre><code>...MyCode</code></pre> and leave out Hello <code>MyCode</code> Therefore you need the following
'/<pre.*?><code.*?>(.*?[<pre.*?><code.*?>.*<\/code><\/pre>]*)<\/code><\/pre>/ism',
I understand that you [were] looking to extend Markdown, adding support for GeSHi syntax highlighting. Beautify does this and more. For example, it can render graphs in DOT.
Beautify's approach to GeSHi code blocks differs from drm/Markdown_Geshi in that "fences" are used. For example:
~~~ php
<?php print('This is PHP code'); ?>
~~~
I'm not sure if Beautify was around back when this question was active, but it seemed worthy of mention in an answer.
I have searched stackoverflow on this problem and did find a few topics, but I feel like there isn't really a solid answer for me on this.
I have a form that users submit and the field's value is stored in a XML file. The XML is set to be encoded with UTF-8.
Every now and then a user will copy/paste text from somewhere and that's when I get the "entity not defined error".
I realize XML only supports a select few entities and anything beyond that is not recognized - hence the parser error.
From what I gather, there's a few options I've seen:
I can find and replace all and swap them out with or an actual space.
I can place the code in question within a CDATA section.
I can include these entities within the XML file.
What I'm doing with the XML file is that the user can enter content into a form, it gets stored in a XML file, and that content then gets displayed as XHTML on a Web page (parsed with SimpleXML).
Of the three options, or any other option(s) I'm not aware of, what's really the best way to deal with these entities?
Thanks,
Ryan
UPDATE
I want to thank everyone for the great feedback. I actually determined what caused my entity errors. All the suggestions made me look into it more deeply!
Some textboxes where plain old textboxes, but my textareas were enhanced with TinyMCE. It turns out, while taking a closer look, that the PHP warnings always referenced data from the TinyMCE enhanced textareas. Later I noticed on a PC that all the characters were taken out (because it couldn't read them), but on a MAC you could see little square boxes referencing the unicode number of that character. The reason it showed up in squares on a MAC in the first place, is because I used utf8_encode to encode data that wasn't in UTF to prevent other parsing errors (which is somehow also related to TinyMCE).
The solution to all this was quite simple:
I added this line entity_encoding : "utf-8" in my tinyMCE.init. Now, all the characters show up the way they are supposed to.
I guess the only thing I don't understand is why the characters still show up when placed in textboxes, because nothing converts them to UTF, but with TinyMCE it was a problem.
I agree that it is purely an encoding issue. In PHP, this is how I solved this problem:
Before passing the html-fragment to SimpleXMLElement constructor I decoded it by using html_entity_decode.
Then further encoded it using utf8_encode().
$headerDoc = '<temp>' . utf8_encode(html_entity_decode($headerFragment)) . '</temp>';
$xmlHeader = new SimpleXMLElement($headerDoc);
Now the above code does not throw any undefined entity errors.
You could HTML-parse the text and have it re-escaped with the respective numeric entities only (like: → ). In any case — simply using un-sanitized user input is a bad idea.
All of the numeric entities are allowed in XML, only the named ones known from HTML do not work (with the exception of &, ", <, >, ').
Most of the time though, you can just write the actual character (ö → ö) to the XML file so there is no need to use an entity reference at all. If you are using a DOM API to manipulate your XML (and you should!) this is your safest bet.
Finally (this is the lazy developer solution) you could build a broken XML file (i.e. not well-formed, with entity errors) and just pass it through tidy for the necessary fix-ups. This may work or may fail depending on just how broken the whole thing is. In my experience, tidy is pretty smart, though, and lets you get away with a lot.
1. I can find and replace all [ ?] and swap them out with [ ?] or an actual space.
This is a robust method, but it requires you to have a table of all the HTML entities (I assume the pasted input is coming from HTML) and to parse the pasted text for entity references.
2. I can place the code in question within a CDATA section.
In other words disable parsing for the whole section? Then you would have to parse it some other way. Could work.
3. I can include these entities within the XML file.
You mean include the entity definitions? I think this is an easy and robust way, if you don't mind making the XML file quite a bit bigger. You could have an "included" file (find one on the web) which is an external entity, which you reference from the top of your main XML file.
One downside is that the XML parser you use has to be one that processes external entities (which not all parsers are required to do). And it must correctly resolve the (possibly relative) URL of the external entity to something accessible. This is not too bad but it may increase constraints on your processing tools.
4. You could forbid non-XML in the pasted content. Among other things, this would disallow entity references that are not predefined in XML (the 5 that Tomalak mentioned) or defined in the content itself. However this may violate the requirements of the application, if users need to be able to paste HTML in there.
5. You could parse the pasted content as HTML into a DOM tree by setting someDiv.innerHTML = thePastedContent;
In other words, create a div somewhere (probably display=none, except for debugging). Say you then have a javascript variable myDiv that holds this div element, and another variable myField that holds the element that is your input text field. Then in javascript you do
myDiv.innerHTML = myField.value;
which takes the unparsed text from myField, parses it into an HTML DOM tree, and sticks it into myDiv as HTML content.
Then you would use some browser-based method for serializing (= "de-parsing") the DOM tree back into XML. See for example this question. Then you send the result to the server as XML.
Whether you want to do this fix in the browser or on the server (as #Hannes suggested) will depend on the size of the data, how quick the response has to be, how beefy your server is, and whether you care about hackers sending not-well-formed XML on purpose.
Use "htmlentities()" with flag "ENT_XML1": htmlentities($value, ENT_XML1);
If you use "SimpleXMLElement" class:
$SimpleXMLElement->addChild($name, htmlentities($value, ENT_XML1));
If you want to convert all characters, this may help you (I wrote it a while back) :
http://www.lautr.com/convert-all-applicable-characters-to-numeric-entities-for-use-in-xml
function _convertAlphaEntitysToNumericEntitys($entity) {
return '&#'.ord(html_entity_decode($entity[0])).';';
}
$content = preg_replace_callback(
'/&([\w\d]+);/i',
'_convertAlphaEntitysToNumericEntitys',
$content);
function _convertAsciOver127toNumericEntitys($entity) {
if(($asciCode = ord($entity[0])) > 127)
return '&#'.$asciCode.';';
else
return $entity[0];
}
$content = preg_replace_callback(
'/[^\w\d ]/i',
'_convertAsciOver127toNumericEntitys', $content);
This question is a general problem for any language that parses XML or JSON (so, basically, every language).
The above answers are for PHP, but a Perl solution would be as easy as...
my $excluderegex =
'^\n\x20-\x20' . # Don't Encode Spaces
'\x30-\x39' . # Don't Encode Numbers
'\x41-\x5a' . # Don't Encode Capitalized Letters
'\x61-\x7a' ; # Don't Encode Lowercase Letters
# in case anything is already encoded
$value = HTML::Entities::decode_entities($value);
# encode properly to numeric
$value = HTML::Entities::encode_numeric($value, $excluderegex);