I've been working on creating a YAML re-formatter based on ruamel.yaml (which you can see here).
I'm currently using version 0.17.20.
Cleaning up comments and whitespace has been difficult. I want to:
ensure there is only one space before the # for EOL comments
align full line comments with the key or item immediately following
remove duplicate blank lines so there is at most one blank line
To get closer to achieving that, I have a custom Emitter class where I extend write_comment to adjust the comments just before writing with super().write_comment(...). However, the Emitter does not know about which key or item comes next because comments are generally attached as post comments.
As I've studied the ruamel.yaml code to figure out how to do this, I found the rtsc mode (Round Trip Split Comments) which looks fantastic because it separates EOLComment, BlankLineComment and FullLineComment instead of lumping them together.
From what I can tell, the Parser and Scanner have been adjusted to capture the comments. So, loading is (mostly?) implemented with this "NEWCMNT" implementation. But Emitter.write_comment expects CommentToken instead of comment line numbers, so dumping does not work yet.
If I update my Emitter.write_comment method, is that enough to finish dumping? Or what else might be necessary? In one of my tries, I ran into a sys.exit in ScannedComments.assign_eol() - what else is needed to finish that?
PS: I wouldn't normally ask how to collaborate on StackOverflow, but this is not a bug report or a feature request, and I'm trying/failing to use a new (undocumented) feature, so I'm filing this here instead of sourceforge.
rtsc is work in progress cq work started but unfinished. It's internals will almost certainly change.
Two of the three points you indicate can relatively easy be implemented:
set the column of each comment to 0 ( by recursively going over a loaded data structure similar to here ) if the column is before the position of the end of the value on a line, you'll get one space between the value and the column
at the same time doing the recursion in the previous point. Take each comment value and do something like:
value = '\n'.join(line.strip() for line in value.splitlines()
while '\n\n\n' in value:
value = value.replace('\n\n\n', '\n\n')
The indentation to the following element is difficult, depends on the
data structure etc. Given that these are full line comments, I suggest
you do some postprocessing of the YAML document you generate:
find a full line comment, gather full line comments until next line is
not full line comment (i.e. some "real" YAML). Since full line comments
are in column[0] if the previous stuff is applied, you don't have to
track if you are in a (multi-line) literal or folded scalar string where
one of the lines happens to start with #
determine number of spaces
before real YAML and apply these to the full line comments.
import sys
import ruamel.yaml
yaml_str = """\
# the following is a example YAML doc
a:
- b: 42
# collapse multiple empty lines
c: |
# this is not a comment
it is the first line of a block style literal scalar
processing this gobbles a newline which doesn't go into a comment
# that is unless you have a (dedented) comment directly following
d: 42 # and some non-full line comment
e: # another one
# and some more comments to align
f: glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser gate
"""
def redo_comments(d):
def do_one(comment):
if not comment:
return
comment.column = 0
value = '\n'.join(line.strip() for line in comment.value.splitlines()) + '\n'
while '\n\n\n' in value:
value = value.replace('\n\n\n', '\n\n')
comment.value = value
def do_values(v):
for x in v:
for comment in x:
do_one(comment)
def do_loc(v):
if v is None:
return
do_one(v[0])
if not v[1]:
return
for comment in v[1]:
do_one(comment)
if isinstance(d, dict):
do_loc(d.ca.comment)
do_values(d.ca.items.values())
for val in d.values():
redo_comments(val)
elif isinstance(d, list):
do_values(d.ca.items.values())
for elem in d:
redo_comments(elem)
def realign_full_line_comments(s):
res = []
buf = []
for line in s.splitlines(True):
if not buf:
if line and line[0] == '#':
buf.append(line)
else:
res.append(line)
else:
if line[0] in '#\n':
buf.append(line)
else:
# YAML line, determine indent
count = 0
while line[count] == ' ':
count += 1
if count > len(line):
break # superfluous?
indent = ' ' * count
for cline in buf:
if cline[0] == '\n': # empty
res.append(cline)
else:
res.append(indent + cline)
buf = []
res.append(line)
return ''.join(res)
yaml = ruamel.yaml.YAML()
# yaml.indent(mapping=4, sequence=4, offset=2)
# yaml.preserve_quotes = True
data = yaml.load(yaml_str)
redo_comments(data)
yaml.dump(data, sys.stdout, transform=realign_full_line_comments)
which gives:
# the following is a example YAML doc
a:
- b: 42
# collapse multiple empty lines
c: |
# this is not a comment
it is the first line of a block style literal scalar
processing this gobbles a newline which doesn't go into a comment
# that is unless you have a (dedented) comment directly following
d: 42 # and some non-full line comment
e: # another one
# and some more comments to align
f: glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser gate
Related
I'm working on a ruamel.yaml (v0.17.4) based YAML reformatter (using the RoundTrip variant to preserve comments).
I want to allow a mix of block- and flow-style maps, but in some cases, I want to convert a flow-style map to use block-style.
In particular, if the flow-style map would be longer than the max line length^, I want to convert that to a block-style map instead of wrapping the line somewhere in the middle of the flow-style map.
^ By "max line length" I mean the best_width that I configure by setting something like yaml.width = 120 where yaml is a ruamel.yaml.YAML instance.
What should I extend to achieve this? The emitter is where the line-length gets calculated so wrapping can occur, but I suspect that is too late to convert between block- and flow-style. I'm also concerned about losing comments when I switch the styles. Here are some possible extension points, can you give me a pointer on where I'm most likely to have success with this?
Emitter.expect_flow_mapping() probably too late for converting flow->block
Serializer.serialize_node() probably too late as it consults node.flow_style
RoundTripRepresenter.represent_mapping() maybe? but this has no idea about line length
I could also walk the data before calling yaml.dump(), but this has no idea about line length.
So, where should I and where can I adjust the flow_style whether a flow-style map would trigger line wrapping?
What I think the most accurate approach is when you encounter a flow-style mapping in the dumping process is to first try to emit it to a buffer and then get the length of the buffer and if that combined with the column that you are in, actually emit block-style.
Any attempt to guesstimate the length of the output without actually trying to write that part of a tree is going to be hard, if not impossible to do without doing the actual emit. Among other things the dumping process actually dumps scalars and reads them back to make sure no quoting needs to be forced (e.g. when you dump a string that reads back like a date). It also handles single key-value pairs in a list in a special way ( [1, a: 42, 3] instead of the more verbose [1, {a: 42}, 3]. So a simple calculation of the length of the scalars that are the keys and values and separating comma, colon and spaces is not going to be precise.
A different approach is to dump your data with a large line width and parse the output and make a set of line numbers for which the line is too long according to the width that you actually want to use. After loading that output back you can walk over the data structure recursively, inspect the .lc attribute to determine the line number on which a flow style mapping (or sequence) started and if that line number is in the set you built beforehand change the mapping to block style. If you have nested flow-style collections, you might have to repeat this process.
If you run the following, the initial dumped value for quote will be on one line.
The change_to_block method as presented changes all mappings/sequences that are too long
that are on one line.
import sys
import ruamel.yaml
yaml_str = """\
movie: bladerunner
quote: {[Batty, Roy]: [
I have seen things you people wouldn't believe.,
Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion.,
I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate.,
]}
"""
class Blockify:
def __init__(self, width, only_first=False, verbose=0):
self._width = width
self._yaml = None
self._only_first = only_first
self._verbose = verbose
#property
def yaml(self):
if self._yaml is None:
self._yaml = y = ruamel.yaml.YAML(typ=['rt', 'string'])
y.preserve_quotes = True
y.width = 2**16
return self._yaml
def __call__(self, d):
pass_nr = 0
changed = [True]
while changed[0]:
changed[0] = False
try:
s = self.yaml.dumps(d)
except AttributeError:
print("use 'pip install ruamel.yaml.string' to install plugin that gives 'dumps' to string")
sys.exit(1)
if self._verbose > 1:
print(s)
too_long = set()
max_ll = -1
for line_nr, line in enumerate(s.splitlines()):
if len(line) > self._width:
too_long.add(line_nr)
if len(line) > max_ll:
max_ll = len(line)
if self._verbose > 0:
print(f'pass: {pass_nr}, lines: {sorted(too_long)}, longest: {max_ll}')
sys.stdout.flush()
new_d = self.yaml.load(s)
self.change_to_block(new_d, too_long, changed, only_first=self._only_first)
d = new_d
pass_nr += 1
return d, s
#staticmethod
def change_to_block(d, too_long, changed, only_first):
if isinstance(d, dict):
if d.fa.flow_style() and d.lc.line in too_long:
d.fa.set_block_style()
changed[0] = True
return # don't convert nested flow styles, might not be necessary
# don't change keys if any value is changed
for v in d.values():
Blockify.change_to_block(v, too_long, changed, only_first)
if only_first and changed[0]:
return
if changed[0]: # don't change keys if value has changed
return
for k in d:
Blockify.change_to_block(k, too_long, changed, only_first)
if only_first and changed[0]:
return
if isinstance(d, (list, tuple)):
if d.fa.flow_style() and d.lc.line in too_long:
d.fa.set_block_style()
changed[0] = True
return # don't convert nested flow styles, might not be necessary
for elem in d:
Blockify.change_to_block(elem, too_long, changed, only_first)
if only_first and changed[0]:
return
blockify = Blockify(96, verbose=2) # set verbose to 0, to suppress progress output
yaml = ruamel.yaml.YAML(typ=['rt', 'string'])
data = yaml.load(yaml_str)
blockified_data, string_output = blockify(data)
print('-'*32, 'result:', '-'*32)
print(string_output) # string_output has no final newline
which gives:
movie: bladerunner
quote: {[Batty, Roy]: [I have seen things you people wouldn't believe., Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion., I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate.]}
pass: 0, lines: [1], longest: 186
movie: bladerunner
quote:
[Batty, Roy]: [I have seen things you people wouldn't believe., Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion., I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate.]
pass: 1, lines: [2], longest: 179
movie: bladerunner
quote:
[Batty, Roy]:
- I have seen things you people wouldn't believe.
- Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion.
- I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate.
pass: 2, lines: [], longest: 67
-------------------------------- result: --------------------------------
movie: bladerunner
quote:
[Batty, Roy]:
- I have seen things you people wouldn't believe.
- Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion.
- I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate.
Please note that when using ruamel.yaml<0.18 the sequence [Batty, Roy] never will be in block style
because the tuple subclass CommentedKeySeq does never get a line number attached.
I would like to compare two of my log files generated before and after an implementation to see if it has impacted anything. However, the order of the logs I get is not the same all the time. Since, the log file also has multiple indented lines, when I tried to sort, everything is sorted. But, I would like to keep the child intact with the parent. Indented lines are spaces and not tab.
Any help would be greatly appreciated. I am fine with any windows solution or Linux one.
Eg of the file:
#This is a sample code
Parent1 to be verified
Child1 to be verified
Child2 to be verified
Child21 to be verified
Child23 to be verified
Child22 to be verified
Child221 to be verified
Child4 to be verified
Child5 to be verified
Child53 to be verified
Child52 to be verified
Child522 to be verified
Child521 to be verified
Child3 to be verified
I am posting another answer here to sort it hierarchically, using python.
The idea is to attach the parents to the children to make sure that the children under the same parent are sorted together.
See the python script below:
"""Attach parent to children in an indentation-structured text"""
from typing import Tuple, List
import sys
# A unique separator to separate the parent and child in each line
SEPARATOR = '#'
# The indentation
INDENT = ' '
def parse_line(line: str) -> Tuple[int, str]:
"""Parse a line into indentation level and its content
with indentation stripped
Args:
line (str): One of the lines from the input file, with newline ending
Returns:
Tuple[int, str]: The indentation level and the content with
indentation stripped.
Raises:
ValueError: If the line is incorrectly indented.
"""
# strip the leading white spaces
lstripped_line = line.lstrip()
# get the indentation
indent = line[:-len(lstripped_line)]
# Let's check if the indentation is correct
# meaning it should be N * INDENT
n = len(indent) // len(INDENT)
if INDENT * n != indent:
raise ValueError(f"Wrong indentation of line: {line}")
return n, lstripped_line.rstrip('\r\n')
def format_text(txtfile: str) -> List[str]:
"""Format the text file by attaching the parent to it children
Args:
txtfile (str): The text file
Returns:
List[str]: A list of formatted lines
"""
formatted = []
par_indent = par_line = None
with open(txtfile) as ftxt:
for line in ftxt:
# get the indentation level and line without indentation
indent, line_noindent = parse_line(line)
# level 1 parents
if indent == 0:
par_indent = indent
par_line = line_noindent
formatted.append(line_noindent)
# children
elif indent > par_indent:
formatted.append(par_line +
SEPARATOR * (indent - par_indent) +
line_noindent)
par_indent = indent
par_line = par_line + SEPARATOR + line_noindent
# siblings or dedentation
else:
# We just need first `indent` parts of parent line as our prefix
prefix = SEPARATOR.join(par_line.split(SEPARATOR)[:indent])
formatted.append(prefix + SEPARATOR + line_noindent)
par_indent = indent
par_line = prefix + SEPARATOR + line_noindent
return formatted
def sort_and_revert(lines: List[str]):
"""Sort the formatted lines and revert the leading parents
into indentations
Args:
lines (List[str]): list of formatted lines
Prints:
The sorted and reverted lines
"""
sorted_lines = sorted(lines)
for line in sorted_lines:
if SEPARATOR not in line:
print(line)
else:
leading, _, orig_line = line.rpartition(SEPARATOR)
print(INDENT * (leading.count(SEPARATOR) + 1) + orig_line)
def main():
"""Main entry"""
if len(sys.argv) < 2:
print(f"Usage: {sys.argv[0]} <file>")
sys.exit(1)
formatted = format_text(sys.argv[1])
sort_and_revert(formatted)
if __name__ == "__main__":
main()
Let's save it as format.py, and we have a test file, say test.txt:
parent2
child2-1
child2-1-1
child2-2
parent1
child1-2
child1-2-2
child1-2-1
child1-1
Let's test it:
$ python format.py test.txt
parent1
child1-1
child1-2
child1-2-1
child1-2-2
parent2
child2-1
child2-1-1
child2-2
If you wonder how the format_text function formats the text, here is the intermediate results, which also explains why we could make file sorted as we wanted:
parent2
parent2#child2-1
parent2#child2-1#child2-1-1
parent2#child2-2
parent1
parent1#child1-2
parent1#child1-2#child1-2-2
parent1#child1-2#child1-2-1
parent1#child1-1
You may see that each child has its parents attached, all the way along to the root. So that the children under the same parent are sorted together.
Short answer (Linux solution):
sed ':a;N;$!ba;s/\n /#/g' test.txt | sort | sed ':a;N;$!ba;s/#/\n /g'
Test it out:
test.txt
parent2
child2-1
child2-1-1
child2-2
parent1
child1-1
child1-2
child1-2-1
$ sed ':a;N;$!ba;s/\n /#/g' test.txt | sort | sed ':a;N;$!ba;s/#/\n /g'
parent1
child1-1
child1-2
child1-2-1
parent2
child2-1
child2-1-1
child2-2
Explanation:
The idea is to replace the newline followed by an indentation/space with a non newline character, which has to be unique in your file (here I used # for example, if it is not unique in your file, use other characters or even a string), because we need to turn it back the newline and indentation/space later.
About sed command:
:a create a label 'a'
N append the next line to the pattern space
$! if not the last line, ba branch (go to) label 'a'
s substitute, /\n / regex for newline followed by a space
/#/ a unique character to replace the newline and space
if it is not unique in your file, use other characters or even a string
/g global match (as many times as it can)
I am struggling to find a text comparison tool or algorithm that can compare an expected text against the current state of the text being typed.
I will have an experimentee typewrite a text that he has in front of his eyes. My idea is to compare the current state of the text against the expected text whenever something is typed. That way I want to find out when and what the subject does wrong (I also want to find errors that are not in the resulting text but were in the intermediate text for some time).
Can someone point me in a direction?
Update #1
I have access to the typing data in a csv format:
This is example output data of me typing "foOBar". Every line has the form (timestamp, Key, Press/Release)
17293398.576653,F,P
17293398.6885,F,R
17293399.135282,LeftShift,P
17293399.626881,LeftShift,R
17293401.313254,O,P
17293401.391732,O,R
17293401.827314,LeftShift,P
17293402.073046,O,P
17293402.184859,O,R
17293403.178612,B,P
17293403.301748,B,R
17293403.458137,LeftShift,R
17293404.966193,A,P
17293405.077869,A,R
17293405.725405,R,P
17293405.815159,R,R
In Python
Given your input csv file (I called it keyboard_records.csv)
17293398.576653,F,P
17293398.6885,F,R
17293399.135282,LeftShift,P
17293399.626881,LeftShift,R
17293401.313254,O,P
17293401.391732,O,R
17293401.827314,LeftShift,P
17293402.073046,O,P
17293402.184859,O,R
17293403.178612,B,P
17293403.301748,B,R
17293403.458137,LeftShift,R
17293404.966193,A,P
17293405.077869,A,R
17293405.725405,R,P
17293405.815159,R,R
The following code does the following:
Read its content and store it in a list named steps
For each step in steps recognizes what happened and
If it was a shift press or release sets a flag (shift_on) accordingly
If it was an arrow pressed moves the cursor (index of current where we insert characters) – if it the cursor is at the start or at the end of the string it shouldn't move, that's why those min() and max()
If it was a letter/number/symbol it adds it in curret at cursor position and increments cursor
Here you have it
import csv
steps = [] # list of all actions performed by user
expected = "Hello"
with open("keyboard.csv") as csvfile:
for row in csv.reader(csvfile, delimiter=','):
steps.append((float(row[0]), row[1], row[2]))
# Now we parse the information
current = [] # text written by the user
shift_on = False # is shift pressed
cursor = 0 # where is the cursor in the current text
for step in steps:
time, key, action = step
if key == 'LeftShift':
if action == 'P':
shift_on = True
else:
shift_on = False
continue
if key == 'LeftArrow' and action == 'P':
cursor = max(0, cursor-1)
continue
if key == 'RightArrow' and action == 'P':
cursor = min(len(current), cursor+1)
continue
if action == 'P':
if shift_on is True:
current.insert(cursor, key.upper())
else:
current.insert(cursor, key.lower())
cursor += 1
# Now you can join current into a string
# and compare current with expected
print(''.join(current)) # printing current (just to see what's happening)
else:
# What to do when a key is released?
# Depends on your needs...
continue
To compare current and expected have a look here.
Note: by playing around with the code above and a few more flags you can make it recognize also symbols. This will depend on your keyboard. In mine Shift + 6 = &, AltGr + E = € and Ctrl + Shift + AltGr + è = {. I think this is a good point to start.
Update
Comparing 2 texts isn't a difficult task and you can find tons of pages on the web about it.
Anyway I wanted to present you an object oriented approach to the problem, so I added the compare part that I previously omitted in the first solution.
This is still a rough code, without primary controls over the input. But, as you asked, this is pointing you in a direction.
class UserText:
# Initialize UserText:
# - empty text
# - cursor at beginning
# - shift off
def __init__(self, expected):
self.expected = expected
self.letters = []
self.cursor = 0
self.shift = False
# compares a and b and returns a
# list containing the indices of
# mismatches between a and b
def compare(a, b):
err = []
for i in range(min(len(a), len(b))):
if a[i] != b[i]:
err.append(i)
return err
# Parse a command given in the
# form (time, key, action)
def parse(self, command):
time, key, action = command
output = ""
if action == 'P':
if key == 'LeftShift':
self.shift = True
elif key == 'LeftArrow':
self.cursor = max(0, self.cursor - 1)
elif key == 'RightArrow':
self.cursor = min(len(self.letters), self.cursor + 1)
else:
# Else, a letter/number was pressed. Let's
# add it to self.letters in cursor position
if self.shift is True:
self.letters.insert(self.cursor, key.upper())
else:
self.letters.insert(self.cursor, key.lower())
self.cursor += 1
########## COMPARE WITH EXPECTED ##########
output += "Expected: \t" + self.expected + "\n"
output += "Current: \t" + str(self) + "\n"
errors = UserText.compare(str(self), self.expected[:len(str(self))])
output += "\t\t"
i = 0
for e in errors:
while i != e:
output += " "
i += 1
output += "^"
i += 1
output += "\n[{} errors at time {}]".format(len(errors), time)
return output
else:
if key == 'LeftShift':
self.shift = False
return output
def __str__(self):
return "".join(self.letters)
import csv
steps = [] # list of all actions performed by user
expected = "foobar"
with open("keyboard.csv") as csvfile:
for row in csv.reader(csvfile, delimiter=','):
steps.append((float(row[0]), row[1], row[2]))
# Now we parse the information
ut = UserText(expected)
for step in steps:
print(ut.parse(step))
The output for the csv file above was:
Expected: foobar
Current: f
[0 errors at time 17293398.576653]
Expected: foobar
Current: fo
[0 errors at time 17293401.313254]
Expected: foobar
Current: foO
^
[1 errors at time 17293402.073046]
Expected: foobar
Current: foOB
^^
[2 errors at time 17293403.178612]
Expected: foobar
Current: foOBa
^^
[2 errors at time 17293404.966193]
Expected: foobar
Current: foOBar
^^
[2 errors at time 17293405.725405]
I found the solution to my own question around a year ago. Now i have time to share it with you:
In their 2003 paper 'Metrics for text entry research: An evaluation of MSD and KSPC, and a new unified error metric', R. William Soukoreff and I. Scott MacKenzie propose three major new metrics: 'total error rate', 'corrected error rate' and 'not corrected error rate'. These metrics have become well established since the publication of this paper. These are exaclty the metrics i was looking for.
If you are trying to do something similiar to what i did, e.g. compare the writing performance on different input devices this is the way to go.
So I have a ZIP reader library, and I read ZIP files by first figuring out where the EOCD record is (the standard way "from the tail"). I have to look for a pattern that is roughly this:
4byte_magic_number, fixed_n_bytes, 2_bytes_of_comment_size, comment
The bytesize of comment is provided in the 2_bytes_of_comment_size. Just scanning for the magic number is insufficient, because I eager-read a substantial portion at the tail of the file - basically the maximum size the ZIP EOCD record can be, and then look for this pattern in there.
So far, I came up with this
def locate_eocd_signature(in_str)
# We have to scan from the _very_ tail. We read the very minimum size
# the EOCD record can have (up to and including the comment size), using
# a sliding window. Once our end offset matches the comment size we found our
# EOCD marker.
eocd_signature_int = 0x06054b50
unpack_pattern = 'VvvvvVVv'
minimum_record_size = 22
end_location = minimum_record_size * -1
loop do
# If the window is nil, we have rolled off the start of the string, nothing to do here.
# We use negative values because if we used positive slice indices
# we would have to detect the rollover ourselves
break unless window = in_str[end_location, minimum_record_size]
window_location = in_str.bytesize + end_location
unpacked = window.unpack(unpack_pattern)
# If we found the signature, pick up the comment size, and check if the size of the window
# plus that comment size is where we are in the string. If we are - bingo.
if unpacked[0] == 0x06054b50 && comment_size = unpacked[-1]
assumed_eocd_location = in_str.bytesize - comment_size - minimum_record_size
# if the comment size is where we should be at - we found our EOCD
return assumed_eocd_location if assumed_eocd_location == window_location
end
end_location -= 1 # Shift the window back, by one byte, and try again.
end
end
but it just screams ugly at me. Is there a better way to do something like this? Is there a pack specifier that says "all the bytes in binary until the the end of the string" that I do not know of? Then I could tack that onto the end of the pack specifier for example... A bit at loss here.
In the end I opted for the following optimization. First, I made a method for finding all the indices of a given substring in a string - there is no stdlib builtin for this.
def all_indices_of_substr_in_str(of_substring, in_string)
last_i = 0
found_at_indices = []
while last_i = in_string.index(of_substring, last_i)
found_at_indices << last_i
last_i += of_substring.bytesize
end
found_at_indices
end
Then, we use it to "latch" onto the offsets in our buffer where our signature was found.
def locate_eocd_signature(in_str)
eocd_signature = 0x06054b50
eocd_signature_str = [eocd_signature].pack('V')
unpack_pattern = 'VvvvvVVv'
minimum_record_size = 22
str_size = in_str.bytesize
indices = all_indices_of_substr_in_str(eocd_signature_str, in_str)
indices.each do |check_at|
maybe_record = in_str[check_at..str_size]
# If the record is smaller than the minimum - we will never recover anything
break if maybe_record.bytesize < minimum_record_size
# Now we check if the record ends with the combination
# of the comment size and an arbitrary byte string of that size.
# If it does - we found our match
*_unused, comment_size = maybe_record.unpack(unpack_pattern)
if (maybe_record.bytesize - minimum_record_size) == comment_size
return check_at # Found the EOCD marker location
end
end
# If we haven't caught anything, return nil deliberately instead of returning the last statement
nil
end
I'm new to python and this site so thank-you in advance for your... understanding. This is my first attempt at a python script.
I'm having what I think is a performance issue trying to solve this problem which is causing me to not get any data back.
This code works on a small text file of a couple pages but when I try to use it on my 35MB real data text file it just hits the CPU and hasn't returned any data (>24 hours now).
Here's a snippet of the real data from the 35MB text file:
D)dddld
d00d90d
dd
ddd
vsddfgsdfgsf
dfsdfdsf
aAAAAAa
221546
29806916295
Meowing
fs:/mod/umbapp/umb/sentbox/221546.pdu
2013:10:4:22:11:31:4
sadfsdfsdf
sdfff
ff
f
29806916295
What's your cat doing?
fs:/mod/umbapp/umb/sentbox/10955.pdu
2013:10:4:22:10:15:4
aaa
aaa
aaaaa
What I'm trying to copy into a new file:
29806916295
Meowing
fs:/mod/umbapp/umb/sentbox/221546.pdu
2013:10:4:22:11:31:4
29806916295
What's your cat doing?
fs:/mod/umbapp/umb/sentbox/10955.pdu
2013:10:4:22:10:15:4
My Python code is:
import re
with open('testdata.txt') as myfile:
content = myfile.read()
text = re.search(r'\d{11}.*\n.*\n.*(\d{4})\D+(\d{2})\D+(\d{1})\D+(\d{2})\D+(\d{2})\D+\d{2}\D+\d{1}', content, re.DOTALL).group()
with open("result.txt", "w") as myfile2:
myfile2.write(text)
Regex isn't the fastest way to search a string. You also compounded the problem by having a very big string (35MB). Reading an entire file into memory is generally not recommended because you may run into memory issues.
Judging from your regex pattern, it seems like you want to capture 4-line groups that start with an 11-digit string and end with some time-line string. Try this code:
import re
start_pattern = re.compile(r'^\d{11}$')
end_pattern = re.compile(r'^\d{4}\D+\d{2}\D+\d{1}\D+\d{2}\D+\d{2}\D+\d{2}\D+\d{1}$')
capturing = 0
capture = ''
with open('output.txt', 'w') as output_file:
with open('input.txt', 'r') as input_file:
for line in input_file:
if capturing > 0 and capturing <= 4:
capturing += 1
capture += line
elif start_pattern.match(line):
capturing = 1
capture = line
if capturing == 4:
if end_pattern.match(line):
output_file.write(capture + '\n')
else:
capturing = 0
It iterates over the input file, line by line. If it finds a line matching the start_pattern, it will read in 3 more. If the 4th line matches the end_pattern, it will write the whole group to the output file.