Accomodate for multiple instruments at the same beamline

[decarlof]

Please review but don't accept yet, I still need to update the docs. Also there is a conflict since we both modified the wrapper functions, we can fix that manually.

[bfrosik]

Francesco, this look really good. I like the new dquality/check directory with the code for all cases. And then the demo that include 32id specifics. The 'wrapper' is not needed, since it is all in demo - looks nice and clean.

[decarlof]

I was also thinking to remove from the functions in check.py the parser since this is now also running in the corresponding demo function (= the parameter are already checked in the demo function so there is no need to repeat the parsing again) unless you expect someone to directly call them from main.

[bfrosik]

Yes, I agree. I thought about the same, while writing the wrappers, but thought that both will be used. With the refactoring it seems redundant.

[decarlof]

@bfrosik ok docs now builds again, I removed the redundant parsers and added a 'default' instrument folder that will be used if a station has only one instrument and/or does not pass the 'instrument' parameter in the function call; still I need to figure out how to make the parser work if a parameter is missing ...

[decarlof]

@bfrosik compiles and runs without errors but logs complains does not find files:

2016-06-14T19:32:08-0500: ERROR: dquality.pv: configuration error: pv_file is not configured 2016-06-14T19:32:13-0500: ERROR: dquality.pv: configuration error: pvs is not configured

etc.

I think I need a better understanding of what the get_file function in utilities does with the statement file = conf[config_name].

[decarlof]

@bfrosik thank you for the dictionary tips. All works now, please have a look. Let me know when you plan to merge, I have a quick solution for the merge conflict.

[bfrosik]

great, I will merge

[bfrosik]

You did a great work Francesco with reorganizing. What would be the merge tip?