Menu
▾
▴
Re: [Configobj-develop] Problem with unrepr mode
|
From: Michael F. <fuz...@vo...> - 2008-09-21 20:04:02
|
Jeffrey Barish wrote: > On Sunday 21 September 2008 13:25:27 Michael Foord wrote: > >> Jeffrey Barish wrote: >> >>> On Sunday 21 September 2008 11:30:36 Michael Foord wrote: >>> >>>> Jeffrey Barish wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sunday 21 September 2008 04:17:50 Michael Foord wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Jeffrey Barish wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Saturday 20 September 2008 18:55:17 Jeffrey Barish wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Configobj was working fine until I switched to using unrepr mode. >>>>>>>> Now it works fine on one platform, but on another the same code >>>>>>>> produces the following error: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>> File "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/configobj.py", line 1272, >>>>>>>> in __init__ self._load(infile, configspec) >>>>>>>> File "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/configobj.py", line 1355, >>>>>>>> in _load raise error >>>>>>>> configobj.ConfigObjError: Parsing failed with several errors. >>>>>>>> First error at line 3. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Line 3 is: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> v = 0.77304964539007093 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I am using version 4.5.3 on python 2.5.2. Considering that the same >>>>>>>> rc file works fine on the other platform, I am at a loss as to what >>>>>>>> to do. Any suggestions? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> The problem appears to arise because there is no compiler module on >>>>>>> this platform (Nokia N800). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Do I have any options other than returning to code like >>>>>>> >>>>>>> if x == 'True' >>>>>>> >>>>>> unrepr mode relies on the compiler module - so it won't work on a >>>>>> platform that doesn't provide it. >>>>>> >>>>>> You could use validate and a configspec to convert types instead. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Michael >>>>>> >>>>> OK. I learned how to use validate. It works nicely for converting >>>>> types and I am also doing range checking, so it's a better solution >>>>> anyway. >>>>> >>>>> One problem, though. In my configuration file I have a section with >>>>> colors, but I don't know a priori what colors it will contain. For >>>>> example: >>>>> >>>>> [colors] >>>>> color1 = [143, 188, 143] >>>>> color2 = [70, 130, 180] >>>>> >>>>> and so on. Since I don't know what the keys are going to be, I presume >>>>> that there is no way for me to validate the entries. Is that true? It >>>>> would be nice to be able to test that values are between 0 and 255 and >>>>> to convert the strings to integers and the brackets to a list. >>>>> Currently I am doing >>>>> >>>>> color1 = 143, 188, 143 >>>>> >>>>> and not validating. >>>>> >>>> You're correct that ConfigObj doesn't support validating arbitrary >>>> entries in a section. It is a worthy feature request though (perhaps "* >>>> = check()"). >>>> >>>> I'll add it to my list - but as I am *still* finishing a book it will be >>>> quicker if someone else implements it. It will need to be in the >>>> ConfigObj.validate method rather than in the validate module. >>>> >>>> Michael >>>> >>> Here's a worse problem: after using config.reload(), all values revert to >>> strings. I have to revalidate after every reload to get values back into >>> their correct types. >>> >> Hmmm... that sounds like correct behaviour to me. Validation is an >> explicit step. >> >> Michael >> > > You make a good point. But consider: If I provided a configspec when I > created the ConfigObj and I then validated the ConfigObj, would it ever > happen that I would not want the ConfigObj validated again when I call > reload? If someone really wanted the values to revert to strings, it seems > to me that he would create a new ConfigObj (without a configspec) rather than > call reload. I see reload as a shortcut for refreshing the values using the > same procedure I used initially to create them. On the other hand, validation requires a validator - and having reload do an implicit validate would require us to keep a reference to the validator used the first time. This may or may not keep a lot of memory in use unnecessarily or even potentially cause us to reuse an object not in a valid state. I see reload as returning the ConfigObj instance to the state immediately after loading - which would be before validation. Is calling validate again really such a big burden? Michael -- http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/ http://www.voidspace.org.uk/ http://www.trypython.org/ http://www.ironpython.info/ http://www.theotherdelia.co.uk/ http://www.resolverhacks.net/ |
