XMLBear: Process error correctly #255

vivek425ster · 2016-03-17T20:02:16Z

Errors were shown as logs instead of errors. Corrected the processing of
output to show the error messages.

Fixes #251

sils · 2016-03-17T20:17:09Z

cancelling non circle builds here as this needs to be rebased later anyway

sils · 2016-03-17T20:17:25Z

repeat: the builds are not failed :) all is well

sils · 2016-03-17T20:18:15Z

bears/xml/XMLBear.py

-            return self._process_corrected(self.stdout_output, filename, file)
-        if self.stderr_output:  # pragma: no cover
+        if self.stderr_output:
+            self.use_stderr = True


just define it outside, like gives corrected

use_stderr isnt really needed. It is used only in lint() and wont be used after this line changes it

@AbdealiJK use_stderr is needed because if not set to True it will print logs also

Ah. you're right. Sorry - I got confused.
@sils1297 it cannot be moved outside.

sils · 2016-03-17T20:18:24Z

unack f7fa889

sils · 2016-03-17T20:27:00Z

bears/xml/XMLBear.py

-        if self.stdout_output:  # only yield Result if stdout is not empty
-            return self._process_corrected(self.stdout_output, filename, file)
-        if self.stderr_output:  # pragma: no cover
+        self.use_stderr = True


this needs to be moved to class level

sils · 2016-03-17T21:10:24Z

bears/xml/XMLBear.py

            return self._process_issues(self.stderr_output, filename)
+        if self.stdout_output:
+            return self._process_corrected(self.stdout_output, filename, file)


why do you switch those two and why do you remove the comment in line 27?

@sils1297 I switched it because if there is an error in stderr then return no need to check stdout else check if something needs to be corrected

If this is a bug that you're trying to fix, please make a new test to test this.

Either way it would be good to add a comment here stating this so that someone else doesnt change it later by mistake
Note: You can use elif instead of if here.

@AbdealiJK Tests are already there which covers everything.
What more tests you want me to add ?

vivek425ster · 2016-03-18T05:03:54Z

@SanketDG @AbdealiJK Any particular reason why coverage is not 100%.
From what i know https://github.com/coala-analyzer/coala-bears/blob/master/tests/xml/XMLBearTest.py#L11 this test should cover the elif case .

AbdealiLoKo · 2016-03-18T09:10:56Z

bears/xml/XMLBear.py

+            self.use_stderr = True
+            if self.stdout_output:  # only yield Result if stdout is not empty
+                return collections.ChainMap(
+                           self._process_issues(self.stderr_output, filename),


indentation ?

@AbdealiJK What's the issue in indentation ?
Isn't it 4 spaces PEP8 doesn't give me any error.

It should be 4 spaces from the beginning of "return"

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:53 PM, vivek425ster [email protected]
wrote:

In bears/xml/XMLBear.py
#255 (comment)
:

@@ -24,10 +26,16 @@ class XMLBear(LocalBear, Lint):
gives_corrected = True

def process_output(self, output, filename, file):

if self.stdout_output: # only yield Result if stdout is not empty

return self._process_corrected(self.stdout_output, filename, file)

if self.stderr_output: # pragma: no cover

if self.stderr_output:

self.use_stderr = True

if self.stdout_output: # only yield Result if stdout is not empty

return collections.ChainMap(

self._process_issues(self.stderr_output, filename),

@AbdealiJK https://github.com/AbdealiJK What's the issue in indentation
?
Isn't it 4 spaces PEP8 doesn't give me any error.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
https://github.com/coala-analyzer/coala-bears/pull/255/files/f0425f051fba52543fd2984750a8277b427e655a#r56629795

vivek425ster · 2016-03-18T09:30:23Z

@SanketDG @AbdealiJK Why isn't this elif getting covered ?
https://codecov.io/github/coala-analyzer/coala-bears/bears/xml/XMLBear.py?ref=f0425f051fba52543fd2984750a8277b427e655a#l-37
From what i know https://github.com/coala-analyzer/coala-bears/blob/master/tests/xml/XMLBearTest.py#L11 this test should cover the elif case .

SanketDG · 2016-03-18T19:30:02Z

bears/xml/XMLBear.py

-        if self.stderr_output:  # pragma: no cover
-            return self._process_issues(self.stderr_output, filename)
+        if self.stderr_output:
+            self.use_stderr = True


not sure if this is needed, why do you keep this here?
The usage of use_stderr is determined in the Lint.lint() function.

@SanketDG It needs to be added because if it is not there then logs will also be printed

Then why not just use_stderr=True

@SanketDG if i do use_stderr = True without checking whether the stderr_output is there or not it will set results_output to stderr_output even when there are no any errors in stderr.
https://github.com/coala-analyzer/coala/blob/master/coalib/bearlib/abstractions/Lint.py#L98

SanketDG · 2016-03-18T20:21:51Z

unack 6d6e9e8

vivek425ster · 2016-03-20T09:53:59Z

@SanketDG @AbdealiJK @sils1297 Any idea why elif is not getting covered .From what i know https://github.com/coala-analyzer/coala-bears/blob/master/tests/xml/XMLBearTest.py#L11 this test should cover the elif case .
This test should cover the elif case.

sils · 2016-03-20T10:28:28Z

seems to be covered now?

vivek425ster · 2016-03-20T10:33:16Z

@sils1297 Yeah i got the problem it was because if both stdout and stderr were empty nothing was being done. i.e. no else statement

Adrianzatreanu · 2016-03-20T10:40:01Z

tests/xml/test_files/xsd-error.xml

@@ -1,4 +1,3 @@
-<?xml version="1.0"?>


why is this needed to be removed?

If I understand correctly, the stdout (which gives corrected output) adds it to the corrected one.
Hence, for coverage of Line 36.

But I havent followed this very closely. So, would be good to let @vivek425ster confirm

@Adrianzatreanu yes it is so that corrections are added as well.
For coverage of Line 34

SanketDG · 2016-03-20T12:32:23Z

cf51a65 needs work

Errors were shown as logs instead of errors. Corrected the processing of output to show the error messages. Fixes coala#251

SanketDG · 2016-03-20T13:57:44Z

ack 06b5761

SanketDG · 2016-03-20T14:02:29Z

ack 06b5761

sils · 2016-03-20T14:13:05Z

@rultor merge

rultor · 2016-03-20T14:13:38Z

@rultor merge

@sils1297 OK, I'll try to merge now. You can check the progress of the merge here

rultor · 2016-03-20T14:15:01Z

@rultor merge

@sils1297 Done! FYI, the full log is here (took me 1min)

vivek425ster force-pushed the issue#251 branch from 3303043 to f7fa889 Compare March 17, 2016 20:03

gitmate-bot added the process/pending review label Mar 17, 2016

sils reviewed Mar 17, 2016
View reviewed changes

vivek425ster force-pushed the issue#251 branch from f7fa889 to fa17fc1 Compare March 17, 2016 20:20

sils reviewed Mar 17, 2016
View reviewed changes

vivek425ster force-pushed the issue#251 branch from fa17fc1 to a1588aa Compare March 17, 2016 20:38

sils reviewed Mar 17, 2016
View reviewed changes

AbdealiLoKo added process/wip and removed process/pending review labels Mar 18, 2016

vivek425ster force-pushed the issue#251 branch from a1588aa to c92d09b Compare March 18, 2016 03:54

gitmate-bot added process/pending review and removed process/wip labels Mar 18, 2016

vivek425ster force-pushed the issue#251 branch 2 times, most recently from 3ffd810 to 8e390b1 Compare March 18, 2016 04:00

vivek425ster force-pushed the issue#251 branch 3 times, most recently from f71a897 to f0425f0 Compare March 18, 2016 09:04

AbdealiLoKo reviewed Mar 18, 2016
View reviewed changes

vivek425ster force-pushed the issue#251 branch from f0425f0 to 6d6e9e8 Compare March 18, 2016 09:42

SanketDG reviewed Mar 18, 2016
View reviewed changes

SanketDG added the process/wip label Mar 18, 2016

SanketDG removed the process/pending review label Mar 18, 2016

vivek425ster force-pushed the issue#251 branch from 6d6e9e8 to 7e6081e Compare March 20, 2016 08:44

gitmate-bot added process/pending review and removed process/wip labels Mar 20, 2016

vivek425ster force-pushed the issue#251 branch 3 times, most recently from f3ccbe4 to 589bb64 Compare March 20, 2016 09:43

vivek425ster force-pushed the issue#251 branch from 589bb64 to cf51a65 Compare March 20, 2016 10:14

Adrianzatreanu reviewed Mar 20, 2016
View reviewed changes

SanketDG added process/wip and removed process/pending review labels Mar 20, 2016

XMLBear: Process error correctly

06b5761

Errors were shown as logs instead of errors. Corrected the processing of output to show the error messages. Fixes coala#251

vivek425ster force-pushed the issue#251 branch from cf51a65 to 06b5761 Compare March 20, 2016 13:20

gitmate-bot added process/pending review and removed process/wip labels Mar 20, 2016

SanketDG added process/approved and removed process/pending review labels Mar 20, 2016

rultor merged commit 06b5761 into coala:master Mar 20, 2016

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

XMLBear: Process error correctly #255

XMLBear: Process error correctly #255

vivek425ster commented Mar 17, 2016

sils commented Mar 17, 2016

sils commented Mar 17, 2016

sils Mar 17, 2016

AbdealiLoKo Mar 18, 2016

vivek425ster Mar 18, 2016

AbdealiLoKo Mar 18, 2016

sils commented Mar 17, 2016

sils Mar 17, 2016

sils Mar 17, 2016

vivek425ster Mar 18, 2016

AbdealiLoKo Mar 18, 2016

vivek425ster Mar 18, 2016

vivek425ster commented Mar 18, 2016

AbdealiLoKo Mar 18, 2016

vivek425ster Mar 18, 2016

AbdealiLoKo Mar 18, 2016

vivek425ster commented Mar 18, 2016

SanketDG Mar 18, 2016

vivek425ster Mar 18, 2016

SanketDG Mar 18, 2016

vivek425ster Mar 19, 2016

SanketDG commented Mar 18, 2016

vivek425ster commented Mar 20, 2016

sils commented Mar 20, 2016

vivek425ster commented Mar 20, 2016

Adrianzatreanu Mar 20, 2016

AbdealiLoKo Mar 20, 2016

vivek425ster Mar 20, 2016

SanketDG commented Mar 20, 2016

SanketDG commented Mar 20, 2016

SanketDG commented Mar 20, 2016

sils commented Mar 20, 2016

rultor commented Mar 20, 2016

rultor commented Mar 20, 2016

XMLBear: Process error correctly #255

XMLBear: Process error correctly #255

Conversation

vivek425ster commented Mar 17, 2016

sils commented Mar 17, 2016

sils commented Mar 17, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sils commented Mar 17, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

vivek425ster commented Mar 18, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

vivek425ster commented Mar 18, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

SanketDG commented Mar 18, 2016

vivek425ster commented Mar 20, 2016

sils commented Mar 20, 2016

vivek425ster commented Mar 20, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

SanketDG commented Mar 20, 2016

SanketDG commented Mar 20, 2016

SanketDG commented Mar 20, 2016

sils commented Mar 20, 2016

rultor commented Mar 20, 2016

rultor commented Mar 20, 2016