Search Results

Search found 5 results on 1 pages for 'rawstring'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

• Passing string with (accidental) escape character loses character even though it's a raw string

  - by Steen

  I have a function with a python doctest that fails because one of the test input strings has a backslash that's treated like an escape character even though I've encoded the string as a raw string. My doctest looks like this: >>> infile = [ "Todo: fix me", "/** todo: fix", "* me", "*/", r"""//\todo stuff to fix""", "TODO fix me too", "toDo bug 4663" ] >>> find_todos( infile ) ['fix me', 'fix', 'stuff to fix', 'fix me too', 'bug 4663'] And the function, which is intended to extract the todo texts from a single line following some variation over a todo specification, looks like this: todos = list() for line in infile: print line if todo_match_obj.search( line ): todos.append( todo_match_obj.search( line ).group( 'todo' ) ) And the regular expression called todo_match_obj is: r"""(?:/{0,2}\**\s?todo):?\s*(?P<todo>.+)""" A quick conversation with my ipython shell gives me: In [35]: print "//\todo" // odo In [36]: print r"""//\todo""" //\todo And, just in case the doctest implementation uses stdout (I haven't checked, sorry): In [37]: sys.stdout.write( r"""//\todo""" ) //\todo My regex-foo is not high by any standards, and I realize that I could be missing something here. EDIT: Following Alex Martellis answer, I would like suggestions on what regular expression would actually match the blasted r"""//\todo fix me""". I know that I did not originally ask for someone to do my homework, and I will accept Alex's answer as it really did answer my question (or confirm my fears). But I promise to upvote any good solutions to my problem here :) I'm using Python 2.6.4 (r264:75706, Dec 7 2009, 18:45:15) Thank you for reading this far (If you skipped directly down here, I understand)

  Read the article

• Sending Parameters with the BizTalk HTTP Adapter

  - by Christopher House

  I've never had occaison to use the BizTalk HTTP adapter since I've always needed SOAP rather than just POX (plain old XML).  Yesterday we decided that we're going to expose some data via a Java servlet that will accept an HTTP post and respond with POX.  I knew BizTalk had an HTTP adapter but I had no idea what it's capabilities were. After a quick read through the BizTalk docs, it was apparent that the HTTP send adapter does in fact do posts.  The concern I had though was how we were going to supply parameters to the servlet.  The examples I had seen using the HTTP adapter all involved posting an XML message to some HTTP location.  Our Java guy, however didn't want to take that approach.  He wanted us to provide a query string via post, much like you'd expect to see on an HTTP get.  I decided to put together a little test scenario and see what I could come up with.  We didn't have a test servlet I could go against and my Java experience is virtually nill, so I decided to put together an ASP.Net project to act as the servlet.  It didn't need to be fancy, just one HttpHandler that accepts a post, reads a parameter and returns XML.  With the HttpHandler done, I put together a simple orchestration to send a message to the handler.  I started by having the orch send a message of type System.String to see what it would look like when the handler received it. I set a breakpoint in my handler and kicked off the orchestration.  Below is what I saw: As I suspected, because of BizTalk's XML serialization, System.String was not going to work.  I thought back to my BizTalk 2004 days and I project I worked on that required sending HTML formatted emails via the SMTP adapter.  To acomplish that, I had used a .Net class with a custom serialization formatter that I got from a Microsoft sample.  The code for the class, RawString can be found here. I created a new class library with the RawString class as well as a static factory class, referenced that in my orchestration project and changed my message type from System.String to RawString.  Below is what the code in my message construction looks like: After deploying the updated orchestration, I fired it off again and checked the breakpoint in my HttpHandler.  This is what I saw: And there you have it.  The RawString message type allowed me to pass a query string in the HTTP post without wrapping it in XML.

  Read the article

• What am I not getting about this abstract class implementation?

  - by Schnapple

  PREFACE: I'm relatively inexperienced in C++ so this very well could be a Day 1 n00b question. I'm working on something whose long term goal is to be portable across multiple operating systems. I have the following files: Utilities.h #include <string> class Utilities { public: Utilities() { }; virtual ~Utilities() { }; virtual std::string ParseString(std::string const& RawString) = 0; }; UtilitiesWin.h (for the Windows class/implementation) #include <string> #include "Utilities.h" class UtilitiesWin : public Utilities { public: UtilitiesWin() { }; virtual ~UtilitiesWin() { }; virtual std::string ParseString(std::string const& RawString); }; UtilitiesWin.cpp #include <string> #include "UtilitiesWin.h" std::string UtilitiesWin::ParseString(std::string const& RawString) { // Magic happens here! // I'll put in a line of code to make it seem valid return ""; } So then elsewhere in my code I have this #include <string> #include "Utilities.h" void SomeProgram::SomeMethod() { Utilities *u = new Utilities(); StringData = u->ParseString(StringData); // StringData defined elsewhere } The compiler (Visual Studio 2008) is dying on the instance declaration c:\somepath\somecode.cpp(3) : error C2259: 'Utilities' : cannot instantiate abstract class due to following members: 'std::string Utilities::ParseString(const std::string &)' : is abstract c:\somepath\utilities.h(9) : see declaration of 'Utilities::ParseString' So in this case what I'm wanting to do is use the abstract class (Utilities) like an interface and have it know to go to the implemented version (UtilitiesWin). Obviously I'm doing something wrong but I'm not sure what. It occurs to me as I'm writing this that there's probably a crucial connection between the UtilitiesWin implementation of the Utilities abstract class that I've missed, but I'm not sure where. I mean, the following works #include <string> #include "UtilitiesWin.h" void SomeProgram::SomeMethod() { Utilities *u = new UtilitiesWin(); StringData = u->ParseString(StringData); // StringData defined elsewhere } but it means I'd have to conditionally go through the different versions later (i.e., UtilitiesMac(), UtilitiesLinux(), etc.) What have I missed here?

  Read the article

• BizTalk SMTP Message Part Getting XML Encoding

  - by alram

  I have a email multi-part message which I am using to send failed message routing from the messagebox to a business users mailbox. Email{ Body - RawString; OriginalMessage - string}; The original message gets set from the received message that activates the orchestration. For example assume the original failed message is from a Flat file that failed disassembly with the contents: Order,1,2,3,4,5,<6>, I set the message using: Email.OriginalMessage = MyUtil.XlangMsgToStringMethod(FailedMessage);// XmlDocument type, this can be malformed xml, valid xml, or flat file that fails in disassembler. I can then write to the event log to test whats in Email.OriginalMessage: System.Diagnostics.EventLog.WriteEntry("BizTalk Server 2006", Email.OriginalMessage, Information); // This displays the correct original message "Order, 1,2,3,4,5,<6," When the email is delivered using a SMTP server and a dynamic send port, with the attachment set to text/plain mime type, the original message gets xml encoding escaped and wrapped in xml: <?xml version="1.0"?> <string>Order, 1,2,3,4,5,&lt;6&gt;,</string> Any ideas why? The SMTP port has passthrutransmit as pipeline. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Using BizTalk to bridge SQL Job and Human Intervention (Requesting Permission)

  - by Kevin Shyr

  I start off the process with either a BizTalk Scheduler (http://biztalkscheduledtask.codeplex.com/releases/view/50363) or a manual file drop of the XML message.  The manual file drop is to allow the SQL  Job to call a "File Copy" SSIS step to copy the trigger file for the next process and allows SQL  Job to be linked back into BizTalk processing. The Process Trigger XML looks like the following.  It is basically the configuration hub of the business process <ns0:MsgSchedulerTriggerSQLJobReceive xmlns:ns0="urn:com:something something">   <ns0:IsProcessAsync>YES</ns0:IsProcessAsync>   <ns0:IsPermissionRequired>YES</ns0:IsPermissionRequired>   <ns0:BusinessProcessName>Data Push</ns0:BusinessProcessName>   <ns0:EmailFrom>[email protected]</ns0:EmailFrom>   <ns0:EmailRecipientToList>[email protected]</ns0:EmailRecipientToList>   <ns0:EmailRecipientCCList>[email protected]</ns0:EmailRecipientCCList>   <ns0:EmailMessageBodyForPermissionRequest>This message was sent to request permission to start the Data Push process.  The SQL Job to be run is WeeklyProcessing_DataPush</ns0:EmailMessageBodyForPermissionRequest>   <ns0:SQLJobName>WeeklyProcessing_DataPush</ns0:SQLJobName>   <ns0:SQLJobStepName>Push_To_Production</ns0:SQLJobStepName>   <ns0:SQLJobMinToWait>1</ns0:SQLJobMinToWait>   <ns0:PermissionRequestTriggerPath>\\server\ETL-BizTalk\Automation\TriggerCreatedByBizTalk\</ns0:PermissionRequestTriggerPath>   <ns0:PermissionRequestApprovedPath>\\server\ETL-BizTalk\Automation\Approved\</ns0:PermissionRequestApprovedPath>   <ns0:PermissionRequestNotApprovedPath>\\server\ETL-BizTalk\Automation\NotApproved\</ns0:PermissionRequestNotApprovedPath> </ns0:MsgSchedulerTriggerSQLJobReceive>   Every node of this schema was promoted to a distinguished field so that the values can be used for decision making in the orchestration.  The first decision made is on the "IsPermissionRequired" field.     If permission is required (IsPermissionRequired=="YES"), BizTalk will use the configuration info in the XML trigger to format the email message.  Here is the snippet of how the email message is constructed. SQLJobEmailMessage.EmailBody     = new Eai.OrchestrationHelpers.XlangCustomFormatters.RawString(         MsgSchedulerTriggerSQLJobReceive.EmailMessageBodyForPermissionRequest +         "<br><br>" +         "By moving the file, you are either giving permission to the process, or disapprove of the process." +         "<br>" +         "This is the file to move: \"" + PermissionTriggerToBeGenereatedHere +         "\"<br>" +         "(You may find it easier to open the destination folder first, then navigate to the sibling folder to get to this file)" +         "<br><br>" +         "To approve, move(NOT copy) the file here: " + MsgSchedulerTriggerSQLJobReceive.PermissionRequestApprovedPath +         "<br><br>" +         "To disapprove, move(NOT copy) the file here: " + MsgSchedulerTriggerSQLJobReceive.PermissionRequestNotApprovedPath +         "<br><br>" +         "The file will be IMMEDIATELY picked up by the automated process.  This is normal.  You should receive a message soon that the file is processed." +         "<br>" +         "Thank you!"     ); SQLJobSendNotification(Microsoft.XLANGs.BaseTypes.Address) = "mailto:" + MsgSchedulerTriggerSQLJobReceive.EmailRecipientToList; SQLJobEmailMessage.EmailBody(Microsoft.XLANGs.BaseTypes.ContentType) = "text/html"; SQLJobEmailMessage(SMTP.Subject) = "Requesting Permission to Start the " + MsgSchedulerTriggerSQLJobReceive.BusinessProcessName; SQLJobEmailMessage(SMTP.From) = MsgSchedulerTriggerSQLJobReceive.EmailFrom; SQLJobEmailMessage(SMTP.CC) = MsgSchedulerTriggerSQLJobReceive.EmailRecipientCCList; SQLJobEmailMessage(SMTP.EmailBodyFileCharset) = "UTF-8"; SQLJobEmailMessage(SMTP.SMTPHost) = "localhost"; SQLJobEmailMessage(SMTP.MessagePartsAttachments) = 2;   After the Permission request email is sent, the next step is to generate the actual Permission Trigger file.  A correlation set is used here on SQLJobName and a newly generated GUID field. <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><ns0:SQLJobAuthorizationTrigger xmlns:ns0="somethingsomething"><SQLJobName>Data Push</SQLJobName><CorrelationGuid>9f7c6b46-0e62-46a7-b3a0-b5327ab03753</CorrelationGuid></ns0:SQLJobAuthorizationTrigger> The end user (the human intervention piece) will either grant permission for this process, or deny it, by moving the Permission Trigger file to either the "Approved" folder or the "NotApproved" folder.  A parallel Listen shape is waiting for either response.   The next set of steps decide how the SQL Job is to be called, or whether it is called at all.  If permission denied, it simply sends out a notification.  If permission is granted, then the flag (IsProcessAsync) in the original Process Trigger is used.  The synchonous part is not really synchronous, but a loop timer to check the status within the calling stored procedure (for more information, check out my previous post:  http://geekswithblogs.net/LifeLongTechie/archive/2010/11/01/execute-sql-job-synchronously-for-biztalk-via-a-stored-procedure.aspx)  If it's async, then the sp starts the job and BizTalk sends out an email.   And of course, some error notification:   Footnote: The next version of this orchestration will have an additional parallel line near the Listen shape with a Delay built in and a Loop to send out a daily reminder if no response has been received from the end user.  The synchronous part is used to gather results and execute a data clean up process so that the SQL Job can be re-tried.  There are manu possibilities here.

  Read the article

1