Add support for algorithm packages, such as algorithmic and algpseudocodex

[Saltsmart]

what is this pull request about?

This pull request adds the support for algorithm packages, such as algorithmic and algpseudocodex

does this relate to an existing issue?

Here is the link: issue 427

does this change any existing behaviour?

yes

what does this add?

Here is a minimal example:

\begin{algorithm}[ht]
    \caption{some caption.}
    \begin{algorithmic}[1]
        \Require{aaa}
        \Ensure{bbb}
        % for-loop
        \For{$n = 1, \dots, 10$}
        \State body
        \EndFor
        % nesting for-loop
        \FOR{for 1}
        \FOR{for 2}
        \FOR{for 3}
        \STATE{some statement.}
        \ENDFOR
        \ENDFOR
        \ENDFOR
        % while-loop in if-statement
        \If{$quality\ge 9$}
        \State $a\gets perfect$
        \ElsIf{$quality\ge 7$}
        \State $a\gets good$
        \ElsIf{$quality\ge 5$}
        \State $a\gets medium$
        \ElsIf{$quality\ge 3$}
        \State $a\gets bad$
        \Else
        \While{$i\le n$}
        \State $sum\gets sum+i$
        \State $i\gets i+1$
        \EndWhile
        \EndIf
        % nesting blocks
        \ForAll{$n \in \{1, \dots, 10\}$}
        \State body
        \Loop
        \State body
        \EndLoop
        \State $sum\gets 0$
        \State $i\gets 1$
        \Repeat
        \State $sum\gets sum+i$
        \State $i\gets i+1$
        \Until{$i>n$}
        \EndFor
        % fuction block
        \Function{Euclid}{$a,b$}\Comment{The g.c.d. of a and b}
        \State $r\gets a\bmod b$
        \While{$r\not=0$}\Comment{We have the answer if r is 0}
        \State $a\gets b$
        \State $b\gets r$
        \State $r\gets a\bmod b$
        \EndWhile
        \State \textbf{return} $b$\Comment{The gcd is b}
        \EndFunction
    \end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}

After merging the pull request, latexindent.pl could format the file as follows (with 4-space indents):

\begin{algorithm}[ht]
    \caption{some caption.}
    \begin{algorithmic}[1]
        \Require{aaa}
        \Ensure{bbb}
        % for-loop
        \For{$n = 1, \dots, 10$}
            \State body
        \EndFor
        % nesting for-loop
        \FOR{for 1}
            \FOR{for 2}
                \FOR{for 3}
                    \STATE{some statement.}
                \ENDFOR
            \ENDFOR
        \ENDFOR
        % while-loop in if-statement
        \If{$quality\ge 9$}
            \State $a\gets perfect$
        \ElsIf{$quality\ge 7$}
            \State $a\gets good$
        \ElsIf{$quality\ge 5$}
            \State $a\gets medium$
        \ElsIf{$quality\ge 3$}
            \State $a\gets bad$
        \Else
            \While{$i\le n$}
                \State $sum\gets sum+i$
                \State $i\gets i+1$
            \EndWhile
        \EndIf
        % nesting blocks
        \ForAll{$n \in \{1, \dots, 10\}$}
            \State body
            \Loop
                \State body
            \EndLoop
            \State $sum\gets 0$
            \State $i\gets 1$
            \Repeat
                \State $sum\gets sum+i$
                \State $i\gets i+1$
            \Until{$i>n$}
        \EndFor
        % fuction block
        \Function{Euclid}{$a,b$}\Comment{The g.c.d. of a and b}
            \State $r\gets a\bmod b$
            \While{$r\not=0$}\Comment{We have the answer if r is 0}
                \State $a\gets b$
                \State $b\gets r$
                \State $r\gets a\bmod b$
            \EndWhile
            \State \textbf{return} $b$\Comment{The gcd is b}
        \EndFunction
    \end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}

how do I test this?

You can test this as the above section depicts.

anything else?

No more further comments. Best wishes for you and your family!

[github-actions]

Thank you for your contribution! Please can you change this pull request so that it goes to the develop branch? Thank you

[cmhughes]

Thanks this looks like a good contribution!

A few comments to address, please

• It looks you might have branched from an earlier version; can you rebase from V3.23.4? you'll see that, for example, Version.pm is out of date on your branch
• the lookForThis: 1 is not necessary, so can you remove it in each occurrence?
• can you add dedicated test cases that demonstrate these to test-cases/ specials? this is really important so that when new features are added/developed, I can ensure that nothing breaks.

Thanks so much for your time on this!

[cmhughes]

This line shouldn't be the default. Please leave this value at 0

[Saltsmart]

This line shouldn't be the default. Please leave this value at 0

Did you refer to this line? I have tried specialBeforeCommand: 0 and found this couldn't format the code.
The picture depicts the result with specialBeforeCommand: 0:

This is the result with specialBeforeCommand: 1:

I'm creating a new fork to rebase from the dev branch (sorry for not noticing this branch :-)), and will start a new pull request.
If there is any idea related to this problem please let me know.

[Saltsmart]

The new pull request: #498