On 2020-04-06 21:38, Arvin Schnell wrote: > On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 05:15:46PM +0200, josef Reidinger wrote: > >> as you can read in previous mails, I am playing with xml parser used in >> YaST. Nokogiri looks like the best option due to its relax ng support and >> its availability in SLE (used in SLES-HA). >> >> And nokogiri has also one interesting feature and that is relaxed parsing >> that tries hard to parse document even when it is malformed[1] ( but you can >> still log errors). >> Example that nokogiri can parse: >> <test> >> <not_closed> >> <not_closed2> >> value >> </not_opened> >> </test> >> >> which results in something like test -> not_closed -> not_closed2 -> value >> tree >> >> I check old yast yast parser and it is strict here and return nil and set >> error. >> Question is should we keep old behavior or try to relax it and just logs >> errors and warnings? For working profiles nothing changes. > > I think there parser should continue to be strict. Just imagine > people start to use broken XML as AutoYaST profiles. Years later > we cannot change the XML parser implementation because it behaves > different for those broken profiles and people complain that we > break compatibility.
I agree. Let's be strict and fail early. Let's not perpetuate the mistakes. > Also see the criticism section in > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robustness_principle. That's kind of similar to the idea of making errors during installation visible right away, instead of trying to hide them and just continue the process pretending nothing happened. Cheers. -- Ancor González Sosa YaST Team at SUSE Linux GmbH -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscr...@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+ow...@opensuse.org
