Menu
▾
▴
Re: [Configobj-develop] - confused by an error message
|
From: Michael F. <fuz...@vo...> - 2009-10-26 21:09:40
|
Pascal Chambon wrote: > Hello > > Here are 3 files that isolate the bug. Just > launch the python file as a script to see. > > * When 2 config sections are present, and one has all its config > values mispelled, we get a "missing section" error instead of "missing > keys" ones. > > * If we remove the valid "[ input ]" section in the INI file (letting > only the 'empty' "[ output ]" one, we get a weirder output : > configobj.validate returns simply "False", not a dictionary, whereas > the doc doesn't mention that behaviour. And so the error message we > want to output is corrupted (we don't even get the name of the missing > section/keys). > > Good luck for with this, if more info/help required just tell me. Ok, so I *finally* got round to looking into this. It turns out that if *every* value in a section is missing (even if the section itself is there) then it also gets marked with a False in the return value from validation. I'm looking now at how easy it is to fix this behaviour. Michael > > Regards, > Pascal Chambon > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *De :* Pascal Chambon [mailto:pyt...@gm...] > *Envoyé :* lundi 29 juin 2009 19:47 > *À :* con...@li... > *Objet :* Re: [Configobj-develop] - confused by an error message > > Sure, I send it in one week (as soon I as get back from holiday to > my work project...) > > Regards, > Pascal > > Michael Foord wrote: >> That does sound like a bug in ConfigObj. Could you post an example ini >> file and code that shows the problem please. >> >> Thanks >> >> Michael >> >> >> -- >> http://www.ironpythoninaction.com >> >> On 29 Jun 2009, at 16:14, Pascal Chambon <pyt...@gm...> wrote: >> >> >>> Hello >>> >>> I just report a little confusion I once faced : I kept having a >>> "missing >>> section" error message when validating my config.ini file, and I >>> didn't >>> understand because the section WAS there. In the end, I realized that >>> there were just typos in the names of the variables inside that >>> section, >>> and it made the validator believe that the section didn't exist at all >>> (actually it existed, but it was empty). >>> So well, if it's not too much trouble for such a minor bug, it might >>> be >>> cool to replace this error message with a more accurate ones ("field >>> mysection.xxx is missing" or smth like that). >>> >>> Cheers for all, >>> regards, >>> Pascal Chambon >>> >>> --- >>> --- >>> --- >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Configobj-develop mailing list >>> Con...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/configobj-develop >>> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> _______________________________________________ >> Configobj-develop mailing list >> Con...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/configobj-develop >> >> > > ********************************* > This message and any attachments (the "message") are confidential and > intended solely for the addressees. > Any unauthorised use or dissemination is prohibited. > Messages are susceptible to alteration. > France Telecom Group shall not be liable for the message if altered, > changed or falsified. > If you are not the intended addressee of this message, please cancel > it immediately and inform the sender. > ******************************** > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Configobj-develop mailing list > Con...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/configobj-develop > -- http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/ http://www.voidspace.org.uk/blog |
