| 1 |
On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 10:14:15 -0700 |
| 2 |
Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 03/05/2016 01:37 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> > Zac, I'm done with code changes in the rewrite. Ready for a last |
| 7 |
> > look before a merge. Can you have a look again? I did some |
| 8 |
> > changes/fixes and rebased them in. Floppym hasn't reported any |
| 9 |
> > more bugs, so I think it's ready for broader testing in a release. |
| 10 |
> > Then we can work on moving all the test data to a separate file in |
| 11 |
> > the tree or downloaded... |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> The dynamic_data stuff in Scanner is a little hard to follow. Then it |
| 14 |
> calls dynamic_data.update(rdata), is there any chance that the update |
| 15 |
> operation might clobber something that shouldn't have been clobbered? |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
No, mostly it just adds new variables to the dynamic_data dictionary. |
| 19 |
In that way it is important the order the checks are run as many rely |
| 20 |
on data supplied by previous checks. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
As I recall there are only a few that are modified by the checks, but |
| 23 |
they need to be. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
I still need to establish a good way of tracking those. Maybe |
| 26 |
something new in the module_spec. But I don't know if that really |
| 27 |
needs an openrc like needs, before, after... But they do need to be |
| 28 |
listed to ease later additions/removals of modules. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
> Also, I see that the number of sys.exit calls in pym/repoman is up |
| 33 |
> from 37 to 41. I would prefer that we raise exceptions for the caller |
| 34 |
> to handle, rather than call sys.exit directly. I suppose we change |
| 35 |
> that later though, after we merge the code. |
| 36 |
> -- |
| 37 |
> Thanks, |
| 38 |
> Zac |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
hmm, I don't recall adding any, that doesn't sound like me. I did |
| 42 |
cringe a little every time I came across them. I do agree that they |
| 43 |
need a better system. But I was concentrating on the modularization. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Rather than wrapping the modules in try: except: pairs, perhaps we |
| 46 |
could add another variable to the dynamic_data similar to "continue", |
| 47 |
only an abandon-ship one, maybe "abort" to take them out of the |
| 48 |
modules. Then the Scanner class could handle the exit in one |
| 49 |
consistent place. Try/except can work nicely, but I've had to disable |
| 50 |
far too many to troubleshoot code from their misuse and being nested 5 |
| 51 |
or more deep. |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
-- |
| 54 |
Brian Dolbec <dolsen> |
Archives