«

On 03/09/2013 11:56 AM, Kene Meniru wrote:
> Dave Angel wrote:
>
>> On 03/09/2013 10:34 AM, Kene Meniru wrote:
>
>>> To use my program the user needs a script file I will call user.py.
>>> Functions from my program must be imported into this file with
>>> something like "from myapp import *".
>>
>> And does the user run this script by doing
>> python user.py
>>
>
> Yes
>
>>>
>>> myapp.py is a module in my program that has all the functions that the
>>> user needs to describe building components. There is also a main
>>> controller object that is imported into myapp.py module called app.
>>>
>>> When python parses user.py module,
>>
>> You presumably mean, "When Python runs the script user.py"
>>
>
> When the user types and enters at the command line: "python user.py"
>
>>> the functions the user has provided
>>> creates building components which are then saved in a dictionary
>>> located in an object called doc that is part of my program.
>>
>> What program is that? Looks to me like you're writing a series of
>> modules, a framework perhaps, that is invoked by the user script.
>>
>
> Yes. I am writing many functions and classes in many modules that work
> together.
>
>>>
>>> The user is free to use the functions in myapp.py to describe building
>>> components. When this process is complete or when the user wants to
>>> view their work-in-progress, they have to place a function called
>>> view() on the last line in user.py.
>>
>> Don't you mean the code in user.py has to *call* the function app.view()
>> when they're all done with defining the components? That has nothing to
>> do with being the last line.
>
> Well... yes. The function is app.view() but it is not called automatically
> by the code in user.py. The following is an example of the contents of
> user.py
>
> ################### begin user.py #############################
> from buildes import *
>
> site("Willow_Creek_Ct", 5)
> """Create a site with name and number of boundaries."""
> level("level1", 3000)
> level("level2", 3000)
> """Create levels with name and height."""
> setLevel("level1")
> """Set the current level to place objects"""
> space("Dining", 5)
> """Create a space with 5 sides (walls)"""
> linearSide("Dining-S1", 3683, 152, 0)
> """Initialize the first side of space called Dining"""
> offset("Dining-S1", (3000, 0, 0))
> """Install the first side of Dining space called Dining-S1"""
> view(POV)
> """Exports objects to POV-Ray format"""
> ################### end user.py #############################
>
>>
>>> This function currently exports
>>
>> You mean writes files into the file system?
>>
>
> Yes.
>
>>> the components into POV-Ray or OpenSCAD format. These are CAD programs
>>> that read script files to render or create images of the described
>>> artifacts. So this means that to view their work the user needs to run
>>> python on user.py to export the building and then run POV-Ray or
>>> OpenSCAD on the exported file to see the building.
>>
>> At that point, the user.py script has completed, and Python is done,
>> right?
>>
>
> Yes
>
>>>
>>> I want to make it possible for the user to preview the building
>>> components without having to use the external rendering programs. I
>>> can currently have the app object provide this preview but it means
>>> that the user will have to process user.py with python then exit the
>>> graphic window each time they need to see changes.
>>
>> What changes are those? You can't change a script while it's executing.
>> Could you clarify this so I can rethink the following paragraph?
>>
>
> Working on the user.py is an iterative process. The user adds new objects or
> changes the parameters of the objects already there and envokes "python
> user.py" each time to see the changes made. Just like using a program like
> LaTeX. You edit your text file and run LaTeX on the file to see the changes
> you made. The process continues until you finish the document.
>
>>
>>
>> So the solution I am looking for is to have a graphic window open that
>> watches user.py for changes.

It would then have to be a separate executable. Are you really saying
you want this window to keep "running" after the script ends? And that
somehow it notices that the user has rerun the user.py script? Or
could it simply be a window created during the user.py run that stays
running till it's closed, which ends the script as well?

>> If there is a change the graphic window
>> updates the rendition of the created components without further
>> intervention by the user.

Is running the script considered intervention? Or do you mean literally
that somebody watches the script for changes (eg. by watching the
timestamp)?

>> However this means that the graphic must
>> somehow run python to parse user.py and then be able to access the
>> objects stored in doc so that the coordinates can be used to update
>> the view. This is where I am having difficulty.
>

Either the "graphic" is in the same process, in which case the script
can only be "parsed" once, or the "graphic" is in a second process, in
which case you're talking some interesting interprocess communication
(ipc). That's certainly do-able, but it's way beyond the scope of the
kind of programming you've been talking about. But sometimes just using
a regular file for transfer is adequate.

If you really want two processes, then you should consider having the
user run the the graphic app, with a commandline parameter of user.py,
and have it create the user.py process. The user.py process runs till
it has created all the data, then sends it via some ipc to the graphic
app. Once sent, it terminates. The graphic app reads the ipc stuff,
updates its graphics, then idles, watching for timestamp changes on the
user.py file.

If you choose to use external file(s) to communicate between the two
processes, you might use pickle or shelve.


--
DaveA

Rick Johnson wrote:

> On Saturday, March 9, 2013 9:34:53 AM UTC-6, Kene Meniru wrote:

> ================================================== ==========
> Interactive Input
> ================================================== ==========
>
> Create an interactive environment where the user can enter commands
> directly into the namespace using your API in real time, then when he is
> ready to see the result of those commands, he can call "display command"
> or push a "display button" and the App will run the appropriate outside
> programs to show the visualization.
>
> ================================================== ==========
> Scripts loaded at runtime
> ================================================== ==========
>
> If you prefer the user to write "scripts", and then have your App read
> these scripts (and create visualizations from the commands within the
> scripts) then the only difference between step 1 and step 2 is *when* the
> commands are interpreted. In this case your app will *load* the scripts
> AFTER they are completely written (this could be done automatically by the
> app at runtime IF the path to these scripts is known, or could be
> accomplished by the user picking files in a dialog (Menu->RunScript).
>

Please see my last response to Dave Angel. I think it is possible for a
program to watch a file. I am not interested in menus which is why I am
going this route. I could easily use PyQt to make this but I am not
interested in graphical user interfaces. Are you are familiar with LaTeX?
That is the system I very much want to emulate.

> I think you are trying to create step 1 without the interactive
> environment. This is your mistake. Having users work with "raw files" and
> then *somehow* watching a "raw file" for certain "display commands" (in
> real time) is folly.
>

It is possible to watch files for changes without user intervention. If a
change is detected (whether by file size or time) the file can be executed
as all python modules can be using "python FILENAME.py". How is this folly?

> Heck, when you edit a file in a text editor you are only seeing a
> representation of the file from the last time it was saved, and your app
> could never know when the "file data" and the "file view" where
> synchronized; without an asinine amount of foolish programming of course.
>
> If this is not what you want, then i suggest you create a simple
> representation of your code (or link to the actual code).

My code is available at http://sourceforge.net/projects/buildes. The
documentation is at http://buildes.sourceforge.net/.

--

Kene
::::::::::::::::::

Dave Angel wrote:

>>>
>>> So the solution I am looking for is to have a graphic window open that
>>> watches user.py for changes.
>
> It would then have to be a separate executable.

This is my thinking too.

> Are you really saying
> you want this window to keep "running" after the script ends? And that
> somehow it notices that the user has rerun the user.py script? Or
> could it simply be a window created during the user.py run that stays
> running till it's closed, which ends the script as well?

Following the idea that it should be a separate executable, the user does
not have to run the script by doing "python user.py" as they would normally
do. The window takes this over. It sits there watching for changes to
user.py such as change in file size and/or time or if the user hits the
enter key while it has focus.

My question really is how can the graphics window have access to the objects
saved in the dictionary of the doc object after running "python user.py". It
need to do this to be able to use their coordinates to redraw the view.

>
>>> If there is a change the graphic window
>>> updates the rendition of the created components without further
>>> intervention by the user.
>
> Is running the script considered intervention? Or do you mean literally
> that somebody watches the script for changes (eg. by watching the
> timestamp)?
>

I do not understand. What I mean is that this happens automatically. The
user no longer needs to do "python user.py" the graphics window now should
do this for the user when changes are detected in user.py by watching
timestamp for example.

>>> However this means that the graphic must
>>> somehow run python to parse user.py and then be able to access the
>>> objects stored in doc so that the coordinates can be used to update
>>> the view. This is where I am having difficulty.
>>

> If you really want two processes, then you should consider having the
> user run the the graphic app, with a commandline parameter of user.py,
> and have it create the user.py process. The user.py process runs till
> it has created all the data, then sends it via some ipc to the graphic
> app. Once sent, it terminates. The graphic app reads the ipc stuff,
> updates its graphics, then idles, watching for timestamp changes on the
> user.py file.
>

This sounds interesting. What is ipc. Can you give me an example?

>

--

Kene
::::::::::::::::::

Kene Meniru wrote:

> Dave Angel wrote:

>> If you really want two processes, then you should consider having the
>> user run the the graphic app, with a commandline parameter of user.py,
>> and have it create the user.py process. The user.py process runs till
>> it has created all the data, then sends it via some ipc to the graphic
>> app. Once sent, it terminates. The graphic app reads the ipc stuff,
>> updates its graphics, then idles, watching for timestamp changes on the
>> user.py file.
>>
>
> This sounds interesting. What is ipc. Can you give me an example?


Actually there is a possible simple solution consistent with the way my
program works already.

I can just provide another exporter for OpenGL that pyglet.window.Window()
subclass will be able to read. So I will provide another parameter for OGL
so the user can use view(OGL). When the user.py script is run, all objects
in doc are converted and exported to a file that the graphics window is
watching. The contents will then be used to update the view. So this means
that the user or the graphics window object can run "python user.py" it no
longer matters how.

Thanks for your comments.

--

Kene
::::::::::::::::::

On Saturday, March 9, 2013 11:21:20 AM UTC-6, Kene Meniru wrote:

> Please see my last response to Dave Angel. I think it is
> possible for a program to watch a file. I am not
> interested in menus which is why I am going this route. I
> could easily use PyQt to make this but I am not interested
> in graphical user interfaces.

Yes, using a non-GUI interface is always much simpler to code than a GUI. Ican see the merit in that approach.

> It is possible to watch files for changes without user
> intervention. If a change is detected (whether by file
> size or time)

Indeed, but the file data on disc and the file data in the text editor cannot be guaranteed to be exact representations of each other at any random sample of time.

> the file can be executed as all python
> modules can be using "python FILENAME.py".

I understand that Python files can be executed (as we all do).

> How is this folly?

Well i don't have enough information *yet* to decide if your program designis "folly", but i can assure you that your explanations of how this program will function are. My problem with your workflow is that it ignores the need to constantly save the edited file data back to disc, because i "assume" you are using a text editor to edit the ".py" files. Sure, you could create a behavior of the editor to save the changes after every keystroke, or every newline, or whatever; but you failed to mentioned how any of this willwork.

> My code is available at
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/buildes. The documentation
> is at http://buildes.sourceforge.net/.

Well GEE-GOLLY-GARSH, thanks for finally posting something we can draw coherency from. May i suggest that next time you post the links in the very first post? I mean, i like playing "guess the number" as much as the next guy,but geez!

Here's the answer to this question.

The summary of the question: how to run a module (called myapp.py) from
another module (called myappwin.py) and be able to access the namespace of
myapp.py from myappwin.py.

------------------------------------------
# contents of myapp.py
import math

class MyApp(object):
def __init__(self):
super(MyApp, self).__init__()
self.name = "MyAppName"


def testFunction():
boke = "Smilling"
print math.sin(1), boke
-----------------------------------------
# contents of myappwin
def test():
dic = {}
execfile("myapp.py", dic)
testObj = dic["MyApp"]() # access MyApp class
dic["testFunction"]() # execute testFunction
print testObj.name # print string


test()
-----------------------------------------
# OUTPUT
$ python myappwin.py
0.841470984808 Smilling
MyAppName

--

Kene
::::::::::::::::::

On 03/11/2013 07:57 PM, Kene Meniru wrote:
> Here's the answer to this question.
>
> The summary of the question: how to run a module (called myapp.py) from
> another module (called myappwin.py) and be able to access the namespace of
> myapp.py from myappwin.py.
>
> ------------------------------------------
> # contents of myapp.py
> import math
>
> class MyApp(object):
> def __init__(self):
> super(MyApp, self).__init__()
> self.name = "MyAppName"
>
>
> def testFunction():
> boke = "Smilling"
> print math.sin(1), boke
> -----------------------------------------
> # contents of myappwin
> def test():
> dic = {}
> execfile("myapp.py", dic)
> testObj = dic["MyApp"]() # access MyApp class
> dic["testFunction"]() # execute testFunction
> print testObj.name # print string
>
>
> test()
> -----------------------------------------
> # OUTPUT
> $ python myappwin.py
> 0.841470984808 Smilling
> MyAppName
>

I hope you're just kidding. execfile() and exec() are two of the most
dangerous mechanisms around. import or __import__() would be much
better, as long as your user hasn't already run myapp.py as his script.


--
DaveA

Dave Angel wrote:

> On 03/11/2013 07:57 PM, Kene Meniru wrote:

>
> I hope you're just kidding. execfile() and exec() are two of the most
> dangerous mechanisms around. import or __import__() would be much
> better, as long as your user hasn't already run myapp.py as his script.
>

It does what I want. Security is another issue and I understand but can't
help it until I find another solution.

import does not do what I want.

How does __import__() work and what do you mean "as long as your user hasn't
already run myapp.py as his script."?

--

Kene
::::::::::::::::::

Dave Angel wrote:

> On 03/11/2013 07:57 PM, Kene Meniru wrote:

>
> I hope you're just kidding. execfile() and exec() are two of the most
> dangerous mechanisms around. import or __import__() would be much
> better, as long as your user hasn't already run myapp.py as his script.
>

Tried __import__ and it seems to execute the myapp.py just like execfile
however it only provides access to objects defined in the module myapp.py
only. Like I mentioned, my program has multiple packages and the objects
myappwin needs access to are stored in an object in another module called
doc.py.

- myapp.py provides the functions used to describe 3D objects
- app.py is imported into myapp.py and is called by the functions after they
create the 3D objects.
- app.py uses another module called doc.py which app.py imports to save the
objects in a class with a dictionary.
- myappwin needs to access the dictionary in the class inside the doc
module.
--

Kene
::::::::::::::::::

On 03/11/2013 09:23 PM, Kene Meniru wrote:
> Dave Angel wrote:
>
>> On 03/11/2013 07:57 PM, Kene Meniru wrote:
>
>>
>> I hope you're just kidding. execfile() and exec() are two of the most
>> dangerous mechanisms around. import or __import__() would be much
>> better, as long as your user hasn't already run myapp.py as his script.
>>
>
> It does what I want. Security is another issue and I understand but can't
> help it until I find another solution.
>
> import does not do what I want.
>
> How does __import__() work and what do you mean "as long as your user hasn't
> already run myapp.py as his script."?
>

The __import__() function is defined
http://docs.python.org/2/library/fun...tml#__import__


appname = "myapp"
usermodule = __import__(appname, globals(), locals(), [], -1)

And now you can use usermodule as though you had imported it in the
usual way.

As for my other caveat, I've said it before in this thread. Make sure
you don't ever load a module by more than one name, or you'll end up
with a mess. And that includes the original script, which is loaded by
the name '__main__'

You also should avoid any circular import, as it can be very tricky to
deal with them.

As I said earlier in the thread:

>>>>
>>>> For example the __import__() function can import a module that you
>>>> don't know the name of ahead of time. It's not often the right
>>>> answer, though, so I hesitate to suggest it.
>>>>
>>>> For another example, if you import a module by two different names,
>>>> or if you import the "module" that is your starting script, then
>>>> you can end up with two instances of such a module, with all sorts
>>>> of negative implications about global data or class attributes
>>>> stored in that module, or even more subtle problems.
>>>>
>>>> For a final example, having a circular import tree can cause
>>>> problems if any of those imports have any global code (like class
>>>> initialization, defining constants, etc.). It's generally much
>>>> better to define a strict hierarchy of who imports whom.



--
DaveA