Closed grauschnabel closed 3 years ago
Thanks for the question.
I thinks, such a YAML:
foo:
!include foo-1.yml
!include foo-2.yml
is illegal, casue it's neither a mapping nor a sequence.
If want it to be a sequence, we shall write the YAML as:
foo:
- !include foo-1.yml
- !include foo-2.yml
it wall be loaded to Python
dictionary object:
{
"foo":
[
{"one": "a"},
{"two": "b"}
]
}
But there "foo" is not a sequence, its a list of sequences. That is exactly my problem. The result I want is
{
"foo":
{
"one": "a",
"two": "b"
}
}
@grauschnabel Do you mean that:
we have two YAML files to be included:
file foo-1.yml
:
one: a
file foo-2.yml
:
two: b
and when we write :
foo:
!include foo-1.yml
!include foo-2.yml
the excepted data is:
{
"foo":
{
"one": "a",
"two": "b"
}
}
Is that?
But the YAML
including constructor can not union two mappings into one.
Because the constructor will first parse a including file into a YAML
node, then PyYAML
puts the node into the doc tree.
So, the including parts of above example are two separated mappings, and can not be joined into one mapping as what they are in the included files literally
i think they will be parsed to something like:
{
"foo":
{"one": "a"}
{"two": "b"}
}
That's illegal.
What's more, PyYAML takes the fragment
!include foo-1.yml
!include foo-2.yml
like:
include("foo-1.yml !include foo-2.yml")
i did not expect that.
I think that
foo:
bar: 1
baz: 2
is absolutly legal in yaml. But now I understand how you have built this tool and the I think that it's a bit like a design issue. Maybe a colon could solve the problem, but that would possibly break compatibility to like its now. I thought about
foo:
!include: bar.yml
!include: baz.yml
Would do the trick to make pyyaml parse it. Otherwise
include("foo-1.yml !include foo-2.yml")
Could be reparsed. by str.split("!include")
.
In both cases: We could load bar and baz and then combine it via dict.update()
so that it is clear that later loaded keys overwrite earlyer definitions of the same key.
What do you think about that?
Thanks for @grauschnabel
foo:
bar: 1
baz: 2
is a valid YAML.
i'll try to avoid pyyaml parsing
foo:
!include: bar.yml
!include: baz.yml
to include("foo-1.yml !include foo-2.yml")
...
You should be able to do it with merging, if you can tolerate some cruft lying around.
one: &one
!include bar.yml
two: &two
!include baz.yml
foo:
<<: [ *one, *two ]
Disclaimer: untested.
Thanks @smurfix
But i think that won't work.
Because what returns by the !include
constructor is a python object, not a YAML
mapping
, and can't inherit
I think it's not easy to do such a thing in PyYAML
's constructor.
Because we can't make it return a document literally.
Perhaps a template engine (eg: Jinja2) is better.
For this issue, we can write a main YAML
file with Jinja2
templates in it, and include other files using the template engine.
Here we use Jinja2
together with jinjyaml:
main.yml
:
foo: !j2 |
{% include "child-1.yml" %}
{% include "child-2.yml" %}
child-1.yml
:
'1.1': one
'1.2': two
child-2.yml
:
'2.1':
2.1.1: three
2.1.2: four
then parse and render it:
from pprint import pprint
import jinja2
import yaml
from jinjyaml import JinjyamlConstructor, jinjyaml_render
TAG = 'j2'
j2_env = jinja2.Environment(
loader=jinja2.FileSystemLoader('path/of/the/yaml/files')
)
constructor = JinjyamlConstructor(env=j2_env)
yaml.add_constructor('!{}'.format(TAG), constructor)
with open('main.yml') as fp:
doc = yaml.load(fp, yaml.Loader)
print(doc)
data = jinjyaml_render(doc, yaml.Loader)
pprint(data)
we'll get
{'foo': <jinjyaml.tagobject.JinjyamlObject object at 0x0000027AB80F0250>}
{'foo': {'1.1': 'one',
'1.2': 'two',
'2.1': {'2.1.1': 'three', '2.1.2': 'four'}}}
I'm trying to get it mapped with more files, but it doesn't work for me.
I have
file foo-1.yml
one: a
file foo-2.ymltwo: b
using
Works fine, I get a
{'foo' :{one: a}}
- thats what I want. But adding another line, likegives an error:
FileNotFoundError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: '/home/martin/Projects/toki/toki/data/yaml/items-area-1.yml !include items-area-2.yml'
And using
makes a list of two dicts.. what can I doo to have just
{foo: {'one': a, 'two': b}}
as a result here?