From: Stephan D. <ste...@gm...> - 2002-06-07 07:37:58
|
Just a thought... why not keep the XML config, but use a preprocessed form? for example: <puffin> <!-- System configuration settings. --> <system> <server host="localhost" port="80"/> <frameworkLogging channelPriority="WARN"> <handler type="StreamHandler"> <param name="msgFormat"><![CDATA[%(message)s]]></param> </handler> </frameworkLogging> </system> </puffin> could be written as: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ puffin system server(host="localhost" port ="80") frameworkLogging(channelPriority="WARN") handler(type="StreamHandler") param(name="msgFormat") <![CDATA[%(message)s]]> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (I left out huge parts of the config :-) This might have the right balance between xml config file and a pythonic feeling. Last year, I posted some code, that should work with the above example here on this list: http://www.geocrawler.com/archives/3/3854/2001/6/100/5988545/ You can find something very similar (XML preprocessing in python) at http://www.scottsweeney.com/projects/slip Scotts code is more mature and better maintained than mine (shame on me) If you have any question about this, I'm on holiday for two weeks, so please drop a private mail. -stephan > Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 20:27:16 -0700 > > On Thursday 06 June 2002 06:38 pm, A. Keyton Weissinger wrote: > > As some of you know, I *LOVE* python. But I gave up trying to force > > others to love it. > > > > There are some hardcore Perl geeks out there that like Puffin but > > hate Python. I have even more requests for a Perl-based > > scripting > > > interface than I do a Python-based one. > > Okay, I have other points below, but the first one is: > > o Screw people who hate Python. > > > Now what you suggest about making the underlying data structure > > Python does make a lot of sense. I will continue to look and > > experiment with that. However, I'm guessing that if I do that, then > > until I get a GUI for the non-Python folks, the only people that will > > help Puffin evolve are the Pythonistas. > > > > Now don't get me wrong, these are clearly the "chosen people" and > > Puffin could do a lot worse with theirs being the governing voices. > > But there are not all that many of them. If I leave it open (i.e. > > predominantly XML-based) then I get LOTS more eyes on the thing and > > make it better for EVERYONE. > > I'm not clear on this. Isn't Puffin already in Python? The architecure > I laid out did NOT remove the XML layer. It just opened up the innards > as something that an enlightened (aka Pythonic) person could use in the > native language. The XML folks would still use the Puffin XML > interface. And some declarative, but anti-XML folks could use a Python > dict instead of an XML doc. > > So I don't see how you think things would get closed. > > - Python folks subclass Plan. > - XML folks invoke the puffin XMLPlan util/class from the command line. > > > It's like Python let's *me* decide if I want to write platform specific > code, or independant code. > And I like having that choice. > > Puffin should let me decide if I want to be a Python QA scripter or an > XML QA scripter. > > > As for using WebUnit. I certainly do NOT have anything against it. It > > makes a lot of sense. I didn't use it the first time around because I > > I've used it and I'm happy with it overall. At the time, some of the > terminology was a bit strange coming from the HTTP spec and OO. An > httpsession is really a "user agent". Or at least that's the term that > most precisely matches it. > > I usually deem "sessions" as the actual session objects found on the > server side in the app server, or the "gray" concept of a user sitting > at a web site for awhile which could arguably include or NOT include a > URL history, a log of pages, mouse clicks, etc. > > This extended into other areas concerning request and response objects > and other tidbits. But I haven't updated in several months, so I'm not > sure of the current state. > > But nothing stopped me from getting my test script written, so thanks > Steve! > > > -Chuck > > _______________________________________________________________ > > Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference > August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm > > _______________________________________________ > Webware-discuss mailing list > Web...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-dis > cuss |
From: Chuck E. <Chu...@ya...> - 2002-06-07 08:16:14
|
On Friday 07 June 2002 12:37 am, Stephan Diehl wrote: > Just a thought... > > why not keep the XML config, but use a preprocessed form? That's fine. There's also a language for these types of things called YAML. http://www.yaml.org/ But this doesn't address the issue of cutting off the framework functionality from Python programmers. And Chris Prinos covered that pretty thoroughly. :-) -Chuck |