Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!ecngs!feeder2.ecngs.de!newsfeed.freenet.ag!news2.euro.net!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAFB6qZtPFQh-pwNRw0gL_wb15gZ2GMK+y=ugrtGe5DqRTo1PCQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFB6qZtPFQh-pwNRw0gL_wb15gZ2GMK+y=ugrtGe5DqRTo1PCQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 23:56:04 +0000
Subject: Re: Is there a more elegant way to handle determing fail status?
From: Oscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benjamin@gmail.com>
To: J <dreadpiratejeff@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: Python List <python-list@python.org>
Precedence: list
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.556.1358294166.2939.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 70
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:36877

On 15 January 2013 23:24, J <dreadpiratejeff@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok, so I have a diagnostic tool, written by someone else. That tool
> runs a series of small tests defined by the user and can simplified
> summary output that can be one of the following:
>
> FAILED_CRITICAL
> FAILED_HIGH
> FAILED_MEDIUM
> FAILED_LOW
> PASSED
>
> I also have a wrapper script I wrote to run these tests, summarize the
> results of all tests aggregated and then fail based on a particular
> fail level.
>
> The idea is that if I run 3 tests with the diagnostic tool and it
> tells me the following:
>
> testA: PASSED
> testB: FAILED_MEDIUM
> testC: PASSED
>
> AND I told the wrapper to only fail on HIGH or above, the wrapper will
> tell me that I had a medium failure, but the wrapper will still exit
> with a 0 (success)
>
> if I get the same results as above, but tell the wrapper to fail on
> LOW, then it will tell me I had that medium failure, but the wrapper
> will exit with a 1 (failure).
>
> The problem is that my exit determination looks like this:
>
>     if fail_priority == fail_levels['FAILED_CRITICAL']:
>         if critical_fails:
>             return 1
>     if fail_priority == fail_levels['FAILED_HIGH']:
>         if critical_fails or high_fails:
>             return 1
>     if fail_priority == fail_levels['FAILED_MEDIUM']:
>         if critical_fails or high_fails or medium_fails:
>             return 1
>     if fail_priority == fail_levels['FAILED_LOW']:
>         if critical_fails or high_fails or medium_fails or low_fails:
>             return 1
>
>     return 0
>
[SNIP]
>
> The exit code determination above works, but it just feels inelegant.
> It feels like there's a better way of implementing that, but I can't
> come up with one that still honors the fail level properly (e.g. other
> solutions will fail on medium, but won't fail properly on medium OR
> higher).

How about the following?

FAILED_CRITICAL = 4
FAILED_HIGH = 3
FAILED_MEDIUM = 2
FAILED_LOW = 1
PASSED = 0

if fail_level:
    print fail_message
if fail_level > fail_priority:
    return 1


Oscar