Re: [Rest2web-develop] Changed all references to value "tests" into value "checks"...

[Michael F. <mi...@pc...>]

Nicola Larosa wrote:
>>I think it makes the config files look more confusing. We use
>>indentation for nesting sections. *so*, you either use what I have done
>>so far, or you have to indent values *inside* a section.
>>
>>Mine (a section indented uniformly) :
>>
>>key = value
>>key2 = value2
>>   [section]
>>   key = value
>>   key2 = value2
>>       [sub-section]
>>       key = value
>>       key2 = value2
>>
>>    [section2]
>>    key = value
>>    key2 = value2
> 
> 
> Wait a minute, how is this compatible with std INI files? ConfigObj reads
> them in flat, then writes them nested, but ConfigParser then keeps reading
> them because it doesn't care for indent?
> 

Hmmm... good point. Although ConfigObj (as it stands) will read standard
section files - but it probably does change them when it writes them out.

> They will *look* different to humans, though, after having passed through
> ConfigObj. :-)
> 
> 
> 
>>Yours (values indented differently from their markers) :
> 
> 
> This is *not* what I was getting at. :-)
> 
[snip..]
> That's not my spec. Here's what I have in mind:
> 
> key = value
> key2 = value2
> 
> [section]
> key = value
> key2 = value2
> 
>     # no scalar values allowed here
> 
>     [sub-section]
>     key = value
>     key2 = value2
> 
> # no scalar values allowed here
> 
> [section2]
> key = value
> key2 = value2
> 
> In summary, starting from your version, I just suggest to dedent everything
> one position (except for top level scalar values that are already at column
> one, of course).
> 
> This looks clearer to me, and if one doesn't use subsections, it is
> *identical* to INI config files.
> 

Ok - so we just special case the top level and restrict scalars to
before any sections. That's not so bad :-)

Should Section.__setitem__ raise an error if you attempt this, (bearing
in mind that normally a new addition would be appended to the end of
sequence) - or should it just put the values in the right place.

I guess the second option is the right one. This means the ``write``
method needs to check all the members and write out the scalars first.
*sigh* (This means it no longer necessarily obeys ``sequence``).

> 
> 
>>Hmm... this has been then *only* implementation I've done of this (as
>>shown in the tests) - so it's a long way down the road to start
>>discussing the basics.
> 
> 
> I don't get exactly what you imply by saying this. I wasn't there early on,
> sure, but nonetheless I hope it's not too late to try and get the basics right.
> 
> 

Au contraire my friend - I only started writing ConfigObj 4 on your
promptings - so you *have* been here from the start. Which is why I'm
surprised this didn't come up before....

Anyway - think I can sort it.

Best Regards,

Fuzzy
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python