Re: YAML and blanks

On 04/19/2010 12:22 PM, Stromberg, Dan wrote:
> On 04/19/2010 12:17 PM, Stromberg, Dan wrote:
>    
>> On 04/19/2010 11:44 AM, Trans wrote:
>>
>>      
>>> On Apr 19, 2:16 pm, Dan Stromberg<[email protected]>    wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>        
>>>> We have a build process that uses YAML - pyyaml specifically, not
>>>> pyyaml-legacy.
>>>>
>>>> When our automated processes put things in the YAML files, the YAML
>>>> parsing works.  But every once in a while a human adds something to a
>>>> YAML file, and sometimes these humans don't add blanks after the colons,
>>>> and then the process blows up.
>>>>
>>>> I've been asked to come up with a YAML parser that will be more lenient
>>>> about not having a blank after a colon.  EG, right now, this doesn't
>>>> work for us:
>>>>
>>>> invoice: 34843
>>>> date   : 2001-01-23
>>>> bill-to:&id001
>>>>         given  :Chris
>>>>         family : Dumars
>>>>
>>>> ...because "given  :Chris" has no space after the colon.
>>>>
>>>> So I have some questions:
>>>> 1) Is there already a YAML parser that relaxes this?
>>>> 2) How can I tell what version of pyyaml we are using?  I see the module
>>>> names match those of pyyaml, but when grep'ing those modules for
>>>> "version", I don't see anything that looks like a version string
>>>> 3) I see that pyyaml's trunk has a "tests" directory - how would I
>>>> invoke these?  Can anyone comment on how comprehensive these tests are?
>>>> 4) Does pyyaml currently insist on a blank after a colon for a good
>>>> reason?  Would eliminating the requirement introduce an ambiguity?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>          
>>> Maybe a simple pre-parser suffice?
>>>
>>>
>>>        
>> I was thinking a sed -i might do it, but then I'm not quite sure where
>> to insert the sed at this point.  Also, I have a feeling my management
>> will prefer a change to the parser.
>>
>> I found that you can run "python setup.py test" for part of my question
>> #3 above.  It gives a C compile error, and then appears to continue
>> testing using pure python code.  The final line of output is "TESTS:
>> 1268" - how does one interpret that?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>      
> It just occured to me - we could replace the file open with a
> subprocess.Popen - but I still suspect my management may favor a change
> to the python parser, assuming that won't introduce an ambiguity.
>    

About question #3:

    I see that the README says the unit tests are comprehensive.

    Also, I intentionally introduced an error and then ran the tests,
    and got:

        TESTS: 1268
        ERRORS: 986

    ...which seems pretty self-explanatory now.

I'm still interested in answers to questions 1, 2, and 4 above.  And if 
someone has something further to add to #3, I certainly wouldn't be 
displeased ^)^

Thanks!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download Intel&#174; Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev

_______________________________________________
Yaml-core mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/yaml-core