On Sunday, June 21, 2015 at 5:56:00 PM UTC-4, Waffle wrote:
> On 21 June 2015 at 17:38, Sahlusar <ahlusar.ahluwa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> > I do agree with you Denis that this is an unconventional approach. I was
> > wondering then that perhaps I should add additional functionality at the
> > XML to JSON step? So far, with JSON objects without nested lists (as
> > values) I have been successful with this (the following is rather lengthy):
> > [snip]
>
>
> > ##JSON sample:
> >
> > data2 = {
> > "OTF": "0",
> > "F": "False",
> > "F": {
> > "Int32": ["0",
> > "0",
> > "0",
> > "0"]
> > },
> > [snip]
> > "PBDS": {
> > "DateTime": ["1/1/0001 12:00:00 AM",
> > "1/1/0001 12:00:00 AM",
> > "1/1/0001 12:00:00 AM",
> > "1/1/0001 12:00:00 AM"]
> > },
> > "PBDS": {
> > "Double": ["0",
> > "0",
> > "0"]
> > },
> > "SCS": {
> > "String": ["1",
> > "2"]
> > }
> > }
> >
> > The result:
>
> and compare those closely now....
>
> >
> > {'D_B': ['0', '0', '0', '0', '0', '0', '0', '0', '0', '0', '0'],
> > 'F_Int32': ['0',
> > '0',
> > '0',
> > '0'],
> > 'OTF': '0',
> > 'PBDS_Double': ['0', '0', '0', '0', '0', '0', '0', '0'],
> > 'SCS_String': ['1', '2']}
> >
> Notice in the original text you have 2 entries under the name F and
> later 2 entiries under the name PBDS. in the result you are missing
> the first entry of each.
> you say you have succeeded in generating json, unless you meant to
> throw away huge swafts of data i would say... nope..
>
>
>
> [snip]
> >
> > I know that this is alot of sequential steps. I am wondering if I could
> > insert or conditionally pass these functions when originally parsing the
> > XML, so that the JSON is formatted for more recursive reading of the JSON
> > dictionary and then writing to CSV? I welcome constructive feedback for
> > refactoring....
>
> theres things you could do to fix up the generated json .. tho really,
>
> stop generating json when you need to generate csv.
> you are winning nothing. you are losing.. well pretty much .. a little
> of everything .. by doing this
>
> there are fundemental properties of xml and json you fail to grasp,
> you are touting code claiming that it works when the output it
> produces is horribly deformed :(
>
> In xml for instance this is valid:
>
> <a>
> <b>1</b>
> </a>
> .. and so is this:
> <a>
> <b>1</b>
> <b>2</b>
> </a>
>
> a naive translatio n of the first might yield
> {"a":
> {"b":1}
> }
> but this will not work with the second example, it would emit
> {"a":
> {"b":1,"b":2}
> }
> which really means
> {"a":
> {"b":2}
> }
>
> if you insist on emitting json as an intermediate step you need to
> take care of these inconsistencies somehow.
> you need to decide which behaviour you want and be explicit about it.
> is it desireable that the last entry overrites the previous one? (you
> have this now, i doubt this is what you want)
> would you like some mergine behaviour? (some config file might work
> well with this, or not)
> would you like to have every entry be a list? (this is simple, but you
> will end up with a lot of junk like {a:[{b:[1]}]}
> do you wrap some things in list but not others?
>
> and the conversion from json to CSV has similar issues ofc.
I am rethinking my strategy and going back to the drawing board. The data is
malformed. I am quite familiar with JSON and XML. I am trying to work within
the parameters given to me. I will rethink this. Thank you for giving me a
reality check with a splash of water. Sometimes it is hard to get one's head
out of the ground....especially when one is new to enterprise and commercial
development.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
