mailRe: [sr #3117] Functionality to inspect interactively after running script - The equivalence to python -i


Others Months | Index by Date | Thread Index
>>   [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Header


Content

Posted by Troels Emtekær Linnet on February 14, 2014 - 10:15:
Hi Edward.

Thank you for the suggestions, which I will implement.

I wonder about the pseudo code.

My problem is that I don't know how to parse the script to the prompt?
Does the prompt needs to be modified to run the given script?

Best
Troels


2014-02-13 18:03 GMT+01:00 Edward d'Auvergne <edward@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
Hi,

The idea in the patch looks ok.  It's worth discussing on the list the
idea though, rather than relying on reading the patch itself.  The
--pedantic flag activates this feature that Chris MacRaild added to
relax back in 2006.  So I gather that the suggestion is to change the
argument:

-p, --pedantic, escalate all warnings to errors

to:

-e, --escalate, escalate all warnings to errors

I guess this is reasonable.  I suggest committing just that change as
one commit yourself.  The current patch also includes the argument:

-p, --prompt, 'Execute the given script and continue into the prompt
mode to allow for interactive inspection'

This should be in a separate commit.  Also, the first letter of the
help text should be in lowercase to match the rest of the help system.
 There is also a problem with the logic of the if-else statement in
the run() method.  I would suggest the pseudo-code:

if script:
    script_status = run_script()
if not script or (script and status.prompt):
    prompt()

So essentially two commits, the first renaming --pedantic, the second
adding the --prompt argument and logic.  What do you think?

Regards,

Edward




On 13 February 2014 17:48, Troels E. Linnet
<NO-REPLY.INVALID-ADDRESS@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Follow-up Comment #1, sr #3117 (project relax):
>
> This follows the discussion at:
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.science.nmr.relax.devel/5000
>
> The next step would be to figure out to run the code and stay in the
> interpreter.
> Is it necessary to write a new function?
>
> Initial pathc applied.
>
> (file #20034)
>     _______________________________________________________
>
> Additional Item Attachment:
>
> File name: first.patch                    Size:5 KB
>
>
>     _______________________________________________________
>
> Reply to this item at:
>
>   <http://gna.org/support/?3117>
>
> _______________________________________________
>   Message sent via/by Gna!
>   http://gna.org/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> relax (http://www.nmr-relax.com)
>
> This is the relax-devel mailing list
> relax-devel@xxxxxxx
>
> To unsubscribe from this list, get a password
> reminder, or change your subscription options,
> visit the list information page at
> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/relax-devel


Related Messages


Powered by MHonArc, Updated Fri Feb 14 11:00:11 2014