From: Gabe W. <gw...@wa...> - 2002-03-01 19:24:26
|
As for the incrementalparser/read thing - I wouldn't do that - I would just pull BufferSegments off the "DataQueue" and feed their payloads directly to the IncrementalParser via feed. The use of read is just a bunch of extra overhead. feed appears to be a perfectly acceptable public method. -Gabe On 1 Mar 2002, Sean Allen wrote: > -----Forwarded Message----- > > From: Sean Allen <ze...@wo...> > To: Sean Allen <ze...@wo...> > Subject: Re: [Pybeep-devel] updates: scheduler and stuff > Date: 01 Mar 2002 11:17:10 -0800 > > On Fri, 2002-03-01 at 10:53, Gabe Wachob wrote: > > > Only two were broken and they were trivial fixes. Maybe this means we are > > behind on our test writing!!! > Yes, yes we are.... > > > I was hoping you'd volunteer! I'm a terribly messy coder and I really like > > having someone else's structure to work against. So please have at it.. > > just let me know what your style guidelines are. > > > I think a simple place to start here would be Guido's python style > guidelines.(http://python.sourceforge.net/peps/pep-0008.html) make sense > to work in a style used in the core libraries and I normally try to > follow these. > > > I was thinking the feed method on IncrementalParser (which just takes > > string data) would obviate the need for a file-like interface. If you > > look at the parse method, all it does is loop through the source parameter > > calling read and passing the results to feed anyway... and even so, the > > DataQueueStream has a read() method that would work just fine for parse (I > > think). > Ok.. cool, I'll look into this. So basically, we are going to work > around the read() method and use it for all our parsing needs... off to > the Incremental Parser source I go.... it was just throwing a wierd > exception at me when I was doing some interpreter testing the other day. > > Sean > -- Gabe Wachob gw...@wa... Personal http://www.wachob.com CTO, WiredObjects http://www.wiredobjects.com |