Extend Options' inputs validation #152
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Codecov ReportBase: 89.41% // Head: 89.41% // No change to project coverage 👍
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #152 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 89.41% 89.41%
=======================================
Files 9 9
Lines 1549 1549
=======================================
Hits 1385 1385
Misses 164 164 Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. ☔ View full report at Codecov. |
Drvi
force-pushed
the
td-input-validation
branch
from
237ebc9
to
21c8b19
Compare
Drvi
commented
Nov 15, 2022
| @@ -197,6 +222,8 @@ function Options( | |||
| quoted && (isempty(oq) || isempty(cq) || isempty(e)) && throw(ArgumentError("quoted=true requires openquotechar, closequotechar, and escapechar to be specified")) | |||
| sent = (sentinel === nothing || sentinel === missing) ? Token[] : map(x -> token(x, "sentinel"), prepare!(sentinel)) | |||
| checksentinel = sentinel !== nothing | |||
| quoted && ((_match(openquotechar, delim) || _match(closequotechar, delim)) || _match(escapechar, delim)) && | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm, maybe the check should be about having a common prefix rather than equality?
quinnj
force-pushed
the
td-input-validation
branch
from
21c8b19
to
d76ad07
Compare
quinnj
added a commit
to JuliaData/CSV.jl
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 4, 2023
Upon review of Parsers.Options validations ([ref](JuliaData/Parsers.jl#152)), @nickrobinson251, @Drvi, and I agree that this shouldn't be valid. The problem is that there's an ambiguity in the case of a _missing_ field vs. an empty quoted field vs. a quoted field with newlines. For example: ```julia a"b"c 1"2"3 # normal row "2"3 # 1st field is missing, but ambiguous with 1st field as quoted `"2"` "1""2"3 # Also ambiguous because the 2nd quote escapes the 3rd, so value is `1"2` ```
quinnj
added a commit
to JuliaData/CSV.jl
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 4, 2023
Upon review of Parsers.Options validations ([ref](JuliaData/Parsers.jl#152)), @nickrobinson251, @Drvi, and I agree that this shouldn't be valid. The problem is that there's an ambiguity in the case of a _missing_ field vs. an empty quoted field vs. a quoted field with newlines. For example: ```julia a"b"c 1"2"3 # normal row "2"3 # 1st field is missing, but ambiguous with 1st field as quoted `"2"` "1""2"3 # Also ambiguous because the 2nd quote escapes the 3rd, so value is `1"2` ```
quinnj
approved these changes
Jan 4, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This generalizes the compatibility checks between
escapechar,openquotechar,closequotechar,delimand the sentinel values. We still fail to correctly validate pairs of regular expressions as those would have to be somehow reduced to their minimal canonical form (I'm sure there is a fancy CS name for this).