[Lognorm] Patches for 'recursive' field type

[Rainer Gerhards]

2015-01-19 16:45 GMT+01:00 singh.janmejay <singh.janmejay at gmail.com>:

> Sure. I thought the patchset fell from the radar, hence the bump.
>
>
I should have communicated that, my fault. I didn't want to have it in the
last release, as there was little time to look in depth. and then a couple
of things happened in parallel ;)

I hope to have much more time to look at liblognorm in the coming months,
but this is right now brewing as well...

Rainer

On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 9:02 PM, Rainer Gerhards <rgerhards at hq.adiscon.com>
> wrote:
>
>> give me a little more time... I am right now working on the CI
>> environment, after Thomas sent in patches this morning. Then auto-package
>> generation and then let's see ;) Just busy as usual...
>>
>> Rainer
>>
>> 2015-01-19 15:43 GMT+01:00 singh.janmejay <singh.janmejay at gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Does this look alright?
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 4:26 PM, singh.janmejay <
>>> singh.janmejay at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Created the PR: https://github.com/rsyslog/liblognorm/pull/11
>>>>
>>>> It also adds a descent field, which like recursive parses parts using
>>>> top level parse-tree, but unlike recursive, it uses a different rulebase.
>>>>
>>>> Added type-interpretation too, which comes handy when objects in
>>>> tokenized or recursively parsed objects need to be specified (it identifies
>>>> int, base16-int, double and boolean as of now).
>>>> Calling it interpret and not type-interpret because it can later be
>>>> used for other things(non type things) too.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 3:58 PM, singh.janmejay <
>>>> singh.janmejay at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> We also have a json-comparer as a part of this patch-set. This allows
>>>>> lognorm tests to use equality tests of json-objects rather than having to
>>>>> work with fragments of json in order to avoid key ordering problem.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 3:56 PM, singh.janmejay <
>>>>> singh.janmejay at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here are code-changes for 'recursive' field-type:
>>>>>> https://github.com/janmejay/liblognorm/compare/janmejay:master...recursive?expand=1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wanted to put it out for review and discussion, hence this link.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'll create a pull request once already open pull request(for regex
>>>>>> support) is wrapped up. Github tries to club old and new changes into one
>>>>>> pull-request which mixes up multiple changes, so im trying to avoid that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Janmejay
>>>>>> http://codehunk.wordpress.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Janmejay
>>>>> http://codehunk.wordpress.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Janmejay
>>>> http://codehunk.wordpress.com
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> Janmejay
>>> http://codehunk.wordpress.com
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lognorm mailing list
>>> Lognorm at lists.adiscon.com
>>> http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/lognorm
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lognorm mailing list
>> Lognorm at lists.adiscon.com
>> http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/lognorm
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Janmejay
> http://codehunk.wordpress.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lognorm mailing list
> Lognorm at lists.adiscon.com
> http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/lognorm
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.adiscon.net/pipermail/lognorm/attachments/20150119/b35d73f5/attachment.html>