Progress on xml to son parser #5
Conversation
…Current code also saves output files on user's specified directory.
XML_to_SON/grammar_parser_test.py
Outdated
| @@ -137,28 +208,45 @@ def handle_choice_element(node): | |||
| def process_schema_from_mjson(xml_string, element_name): | |||
| root = ET.fromstring(xml_string) | |||
| processed_content = process_node(root) | |||
|
|
|||
| return {element_name: processed_content} | |||
|
|
|||
| def integrate_detailed_schemas(final_json, processed_facilities, processed_regions, processed_institutions): | |||
| for facility_name, facility_config in processed_facilities.items(): | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Given all the repetition here, you could instead do:
for agent_type, agent_list in zip(['facility', 'institution', 'region'],
[processed_facilities, processed_instutitions, processed_regions]):
if agent_type in final_json["simulation"]:
for agent_name, agent_config in agent_list.items():
if agent_name in final_json["simulation"][agent_type]["config"]["ChildAtMostOne"]:
new_agent_config = {"InputTmpl": f'"{agent_name}", "MaxOccurs": 1}
new_agent_config.update(agent_config)
final_json["simulation"][agent_type]["config"][agent_name] = new_agent_config
XML_to_SON/grammar_parser_test.py
Outdated
| child_indent = base_indent + tab | ||
|
|
||
| matching_keys = [key for key in annotations.keys() if key.endswith(key_name)] | ||
| matching_keys = [key for key in annotations.keys() if key.split(":")[-2] == key_name.split("_")[-3] and key.split(":")[-1] == key_name.split("_")[-1]] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this will be more readable if we define the following with variables first:
key_name.split("_")[-3]key_name.split("_")[-1]
…as to reduce repetition.
|
Done! I reduced the repetition (very nice structure), and added variables to improve readability. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've requested a few changes here. It's a lot of code to review and I wish we could have done it in more pieces.
I think it would help to have a lot more comments because the specialized knowledge you are acquiring is not clear from the code (and may never be from the code alone). On the other hand, there may be value in more modularity/functions that help describe things instead of comments, in some places.
XML_to_SON/grammar_parser_test.py
Outdated
| 'silver': [192, 192, 192]} | ||
| self.highlight_str = self.make_basic_son() | ||
|
|
||
| def highlight_maker(self, name, word, color='blue'): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we can add bold and italic as function parameters and then use it to set the right characteristics of a rule
XML_to_SON/grammar_parser_test.py
Outdated
| # highlight_str += highlight_maker('brack_open', '{', 'red') | ||
| # highlight_str += highlight_maker('brack_close', '}', 'red') | ||
| # highlight_str += highlight_maker('square_open', '[', 'lime') | ||
| # highlight_str += highlight_maker('square_close', ']', 'lime') |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Did you comment these out? Might be good to put them back in.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These were commented out by Jin Whan. I uncommented it to add them to the highlighter, but the items don't get highlighted. I tried multiple times to see if I was doing something wrong, but it appears that they are not recognized as elements that can be highlighted.
XML_to_SON/grammar_parser_test.py
Outdated
| highlight_str += '''rule("Quoted string") { | ||
| pattern = """'[^']*'|"[^"]*"""" | ||
| bold = true | ||
| foreground { | ||
| red = 255 | ||
| green = 130 | ||
| blue = 0 | ||
| } | ||
| background { | ||
| red = 255 | ||
| green = 130 | ||
| blue = 0 | ||
| alpha = 25 | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| rule("equal"){ | ||
| pattern="=" | ||
| background{ | ||
| red=192 | ||
| green=192 | ||
| blue=192 | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| rule("Comment") { | ||
| pattern = "%.*" | ||
| italic = true | ||
| foreground { | ||
| red = 0 | ||
| green = 128 | ||
| blue = 0 | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| ''' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can't we use the highlight_maker function for these? especially if we extend it to support italics and add more colors to the color list
XML_to_SON/grammar_parser_test.py
Outdated
| replacement_text = generate_child_exactly_one_line('facility') | ||
| node.text = node.text.replace('@Facility_REFS@', replacement_text) | ||
| return f"[{' '.join(facilities)}]", {} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seems like this could be a little function since we reuse it in all three cases.
XML_to_SON/grammar_parser_test.py
Outdated
| new_region_config.update(region_config) | ||
| final_json["simulation"]["region"]["config"][region_name] = new_region_config | ||
|
|
||
| for agent_type, agent_list in zip(['facility', 'region'], [processed_facilities, processed_regions]): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It might be safer/more readable to manually bind/zip these since there will only ever be two:
| for agent_type, agent_list in zip(['facility', 'region'], [processed_facilities, processed_regions]): | |
| for agent_type, agent_list in [ ('facility, processed_facilities), ('region', processed_regions) ]: |
…highlighter class and some other modularity/function issues.
Improved automatic template generation for autocompletion mechanism. Current code also saves output files on user's specified directory.