Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ACEGenerator and ACETransferer out of sync with delphin.commands.process() #278

Closed
goodmami opened this issue Jan 22, 2020 · 2 comments
Closed
Labels

Comments

@goodmami
Copy link
Member

delphin.commands.process() calls the processor with the stderr argument for redirecting ACE's stderr. The ACEGenerator and ACETransferer did not accept this argument because, for a while, they relied on stderr to interpret the results. Now they give a TypeError when called from process() because of the unexpected argument.

There are still some arguments they do not uniformly take, such as tsdbinfo (not allowed on ACETransferer) and full_forest (only allowed on ACEParser)

@goodmami goodmami added the bug label Jan 22, 2020
@arademaker
Copy link
Member

how to deal with these arguments not uniformly take? Is it an issue for ACE, right?

@goodmami
Copy link
Member Author

@arademaker no it's an issue with PyDelphin. I have not been testing transfer and generation from the delphin.commands.process() function or the delphin process command and there was a regression in the way they call the respective classes in delphin.ace. Nothing was broken if you did generation or transfer using delphin.ace directly, only when you tried to do those tasks from process().

The stderr parameter allows you to redirect ACE's stderr stream to some other stream or file. The benefit over doing 2>ace.err at the command line is that you can avoid getting PyDelphin stderr messages as well.

The fix is easy; I just came across the bug when testing the last release (unfortunately, after it was released).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants