mbeckerle commented on code in PR #799:
URL: https://github.com/apache/daffodil/pull/799#discussion_r892803346
##########
daffodil-tdml-lib/src/main/scala/org/apache/daffodil/tdml/TDMLRunner.scala:
##########
@@ -2364,6 +2358,53 @@ sealed abstract class DocumentPart(part: Node, parent:
Document) {
}
}.trim.toUpperCase()
+ private lazy val doubleForwardPattern = "//.*".r
+ private lazy val openClosePattern = "/[*](.|\n)*?[*]/".r
+
+ //Accessor for doubleForwardPattern regex
+ def getDoubleForwardPattern() : scala.util.matching.Regex = {
+ return doubleForwardPattern
+ }
+
+ //Accessor for openClosePattern regex
+ def getOpenClosePattern() : scala.util.matching.Regex = {
+ return openClosePattern
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * Allow "//" and "/* */" (inline) to act as comments.
+ * Any valid XML characters not explicitly allowed are also considered
comments and are removed.
+ */
+ def canonicalizeData(validCharactersSet : String, userData : String) :
String = {
+ val noWarnCharsSet = "|()[]."
+ var doWarning: Boolean = false
+ Assert.invariant(!userData.contains('\r')) // \r should not exist in
userData
+
+ //Remove the comments (//) and (/* */)
+ val noCommentsForward = getDoubleForwardPattern().replaceAllIn(userData,"")
+ val noCommentsBothFormats =
getOpenClosePattern().replaceAllIn(noCommentsForward,"")
+
+ //Throw exception if /* or */ still found. This means user input was not
formatted correctly.
+ if(noCommentsBothFormats.contains("/*") ||
noCommentsBothFormats.contains("*/")){
+ throw TDMLException("Improper formatting of /* */ style comment", None)
+ }
+
+ //Split on new line and white spaces - concatenate after
+ val noCommentsString = noCommentsBothFormats.split("\\s").mkString
+
+ //Check value of the characters, if invalid character found create log and
skip over it
+ val validData = noCommentsString.map{ch =>
+ if(validCharactersSet.contains(ch)) ch
+ else { if(!noWarnCharsSet.contains(ch)) doWarning=true; ""}
+ }
Review Comment:
Varun changed it to this flag at my suggestion. So we're debating this
functional-programming or not on this PR thread.
I actually think it is clearer that as you traverse, if you notice the
warning is needed you set the flag, rather than the redundant computations
which always require me to understand why one is doing it that way.
I don't feel strongly about "to FP or not to FP" in this particular case.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
