improve the stdout parsing #174
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
keewis
commented
Aug 22, 2022
| @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ ignore = | |||
| max-line-length = 100 | |||
| max-complexity = 18 | |||
| select = B,C,E,F,W,T4,B9 | |||
| extend-ignore = E203,E501,E402,W605 | |||
| extend-ignore = E203,E501,E402,W605,W503 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I actually don't need that one anymore, but note that that warning is incompatible with black
andersy005
approved these changes
Sep 8, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The last remaining issue I had with
jupyter-forwardis that jupyterlab would sometimes log warnings fromyarn(something about not being able to open a configuration file), which unfortunately also contains a url. This url is then the first oneparse_stdouttries to parse and fails, because it doesn't contain a port.I think there are two options to fix this: improve the regular expression, or filter the set of extracted urls. The latter is probably easier to implement but less general, while the former is more sensitive to changes in the log output (not sure how likely that is to happen, though).
I would be open to implementing both, but I would imagine the filtering to be a bit easier (which is why I chose to implement that in this PR).