Feature/additional components #115

Tyler-Ward · 2020-07-20T19:42:21Z

Draft implementation of #50.

An exmple file to work with this is shown below.

connectors:
  X1:
    type: Powerpole
    pinout: [GND, VCC]
    ignore_in_bom: true
    additional_components:
      -
        type: housing
        qty: 1
        unit: ea
        manufacturer: Anderson
        manufacturer_part_number: 1327G6
        internal_part_number: powerpole-black
      -
        type: housing
        qty: 1
        unit: ea
        manufacturer: Anderson
        manufacturer_part_number: 1327
        internal_part_number: powerpole-red
      -
        type: crimp
        qty: pincount
        unit: ea
        manufacturer: Anderson
        manufacturer_part_number: 1331
        internal_part_number: powerpole-crimp-30A
  X2: &mf3-5
    type: Molex Micro-Fit
    subtype: female
    pinout: [GND, VCC, A, B, C]
    manufacturer_part_number: 436450500
    manufacturer: Molex
    internal_part_number: MF3.0-5
    additional_components:
      -
        type: crimp
        qty: connectioncount
        unit: ea
        manufacturer: Molex
        manufacturer_part_number: 43030-0007
        internal_part_number: MF3.0-Crimp

  X3:
    <<: *mf3-5

cables:
  W1: &wire_power # define template
    colors: [BK, RD] # number of wires implicit in color list
    gauge: 0.25 # assume mm2 if no gauge unit is specified
    show_equiv: true
    length: 0.2
    manufacturer_part_number: 123456

  W2:
    <<: *wire_power

connections:
  -
    - X1: [1-2]
    - W1: [1-2]
    - X2: [1-2]
  -
    - X1: [1-2]
    - W2: [1-2]
    - X3: [1-2]

Tyler-Ward · 2020-07-21T23:19:23Z

This is now just about functional but needs cleanup of the code, making the output look better, error checking, altered names to match #114 and addition of later sugestions in #50. Will continue this after #114 is done.

formatc1702 · 2020-07-22T05:27:05Z

Not too shabby!

My feeling is that the mini-BOMs within the nodes should be either one line per item (might stretch the nodes, I know),
one multiline cell per item (to easily distinguish separate items visually) or something similar. If I have a new suggestion, I can let you know.

Note: The unit is missing on the cable's sleeving, as well as the crimps and housing (should be showing ea)

formatc1702 · 2020-07-22T05:33:11Z

Another idea which might keep the diagram simple, but definitely require the BOM table, is the following:

Auto-assign an Item Number (e.g. 1, 2, 3, ... or 10, 20, 30, ...) to every BOM item, show item number as first column in master BOM
In the mini-BOMs, show one line = one cell per item in the format:
{qty} {unit} x {itemno} for maximum minimalism, forcing some cross-referencing
or
{qty} {unit} x {itemno} ({description}) to keep it user-friendly but at least keeping the P/Ns out of it.

One could do a separate cell for each {} but hide the vertical borders within a line to get a nice table look without to much visual clutter?

I get the feeling that someone going as far as specifying every single crimp and mm of heatshrink, is also the kind of person that would want a proper BOM and not be satisfied with a PNG image anyway 🤓 so it wouldn't matter if the PNG was missing every bit of detail.

formatc1702 · 2020-07-22T06:17:14Z

Quick reminder to use imperative mood in git commit messages ;)

Tyler-Ward · 2020-09-20T01:25:15Z

This branch has now been brought up to date with dev and the rest of the ideas from #50 have been aded in.

Merging the Bom items to a single cell definatley looks better. Using bom indexing to make the graph simpler sounds like a good idea, this will need some refactoring of the BOM generation code to get this to work but should be fairly easy to add once that is done. Other than that I think the only other thing that needs adding is adding a tutorial and syntax description (once #111 is merged in).

Tyler-Ward · 2020-09-26T14:06:21Z

The Bom has been refactored to remove duplications and add an id that can be looekd up when generating a graph. this is then used for the aditional components sections. The aditional component mode can be changed by a harness attribute to slect the option above but this will need #158 or similar in order to be used

kvid

@Tyler-Ward Thank you for this very useful contribution. I'm just another contributor, like you. @formatc1702 is the owner that approves and merges PRs into dev when he thinks they are ready. He has been on vacation for several weeks, and I decided to review your PR and suggest some changes that I believe will help you getting this PR accepted, but remember that @formatc1702 might not share all my opinions.

I like the BOM deduplication at the end as it enables removing a lot of other complex deduplication code.
Consider moving more duplicated code into common (generic if needed) functions.

kvid · 2020-09-26T16:45:22Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+                        elif extra['qty_multiplier'] == 'length':
+                            qty *= cable.length


Initially, I was going to suggest forcing extra['unit'] = 'm' in this case, but then I discovered a use case where that would be a bad idea: When specifying, e.g. 5 cable clamps per meter, then the unit cannot be meter. Therefore, I conclude: Keep it as is to also enable such use cases.

kvid · 2020-09-26T16:57:09Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+                        elif extra['qty_multiplier'] == 'total_length':
+                            qty *= cable.length * cable.wirecount
+                        else:
+                            raise ValueError('invalid qty parameter {}'.format(extra["qty_multiplier"]))


I suggest using f-string like the rest of the code, call it a multiplier, and add quotes around the value:

raise ValueError(f'invalid qty multiplier "{extra["qty_multiplier"]}"')

kvid · 2020-09-26T17:08:56Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+                        id = self.get_bom_index(extra_component_long_name(extra["type"], extra.get("subtype", None)), extra.get("unit", None), extra.get("manufacturer", None), extra.get("mpn", None), extra.get("pn", None))
+                        rows.append(html_line_breaks(component_table_entry(f'{id} ({extra["type"].capitalize()})', qty, extra.get("unit", None), None, None, None)))
+                    else:
+                        rows.append(html_line_breaks(component_table_entry(extra_component_long_name(extra["type"], extra.get("subtype", None)), qty, extra.get("unit", None), extra.get("pn", None), extra.get("manufacturer", None), extra.get("mpn", None))))


I suggest removing all 14 None arguments here. The second parameter of .get() and the last 4 parameters of component_table_entry() are all optional with default value=None. Simpler code is normally easier to read.

kvid · 2020-09-26T17:10:53Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+                        id = self.get_bom_index(extra_component_long_name(extra["type"], extra.get("subtype", None)), extra.get("unit", None), extra.get("manufacturer", None), extra.get("mpn", None), extra.get("pn", None))
+                        rows.append(html_line_breaks(component_table_entry(f'{id} ({extra["type"].capitalize()})', qty, extra.get("unit", None), None, None, None)))
+                    else:
+                        rows.append(html_line_breaks(extra_component_long_name(extra["type"], extra.get("subtype", None)), qty, extra.get("unit", None), extra.get("pn", None), extra.get("manufacturer", None), extra.get("mpn", None)))


I suggest removing all 14 None arguments here. The second parameter of .get() and the last 4 parameters of component_table_entry() are all optional with default value=None. Simpler code is normally easier to read.

kvid · 2020-09-26T17:11:46Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+                        elif extra['qty_multiplier'] == 'populated':
+                            qty *= sum(1 for value in connector.visible_pins.values() if value is True)
+                        else:
+                            raise ValueError('invalid qty parameter {}'.format(extra["qty_multiplier"]))


I suggest using f-string like the rest of the code, call it a multiplier, and add quotes around the value:

raise ValueError(f'invalid qty multiplier "{extra["qty_multiplier"]}"')

kvid · 2020-09-27T16:09:05Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+                        elif part['qty_multiplier'] == 'total_length':
+                            qty *= cable.length * cable.wirecount
+                        else:
+                            raise ValueError('invalid qty parameter {}'.format(part["qty_multiplier"]))


I suggest using f-string like the rest of the code, call it a multiplier, and add quotes around the value:

raise ValueError(f'invalid qty multiplier "{extra["qty_multiplier"]}"')

kvid · 2020-09-27T16:22:10Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+            shared = items[0]
+            designators = []
+            for item in items:
+                if "designators" in item and item['designators']:


Consider instead: if item.get('designators'):

kvid · 2020-09-27T16:26:22Z

src/wireviz/wv_helper.py

+    output = f'<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="3" cellborder="1"><tr><td align="left" balign="left">{output}</td></tr></table>'
+    return output


Consider joining these two lines by removing the assignment and return the expression directly.

kvid · 2020-09-27T16:26:33Z

src/wireviz/wv_helper.py

+    name = f'{type.capitalize()}{name_subtype}'
+    return name


Consider joining these two lines by removing the assignment and return the expression directly.

kvid · 2020-09-27T20:49:56Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py


        for item in self.additional_bom_items:
            name = item['description'] if item.get('description', None) else ''
-            if isinstance(item.get('designators', None), List):
-                item['designators'].sort()  # sort designators if a list is provided
            item = {'item': name, 'qty': item.get('qty', None), 'unit': item.get('unit', None), 'designators': item.get('designators', None),
                    'manufacturer': item.get('manufacturer', None), 'mpn': item.get('mpn', None), 'pn': item.get('pn', None)}


I suggest removing all 7 None arguments in the 4 lines above. The second parameter of .get() is optional with default value=None. Simpler code is normally easier to read.

Tyler-Ward · 2020-09-29T20:31:48Z

Thanks for your detailed comments @kvid. They all look good so have integrated them. Moving the components to a dataclass rather than a dict definatly helped the readability of the code in harness.py

kvid

Thank you for accepting my suggestions.
See code comments for some extra simplification suggestions.

kvid · 2020-09-30T22:19:15Z

src/wireviz/DataClasses.py

+    unit: Optional[str] = None
+    qty_multiplier: Optional[str] = None
+
+    def long_name(self) -> str:


Consider adding a @property decorator in a new line in front of this method to access the value as a property, e.g. extra.long_name (without the parentheses).

src/wireviz/DataClasses.py

kvid · 2020-09-30T22:47:58Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

-                    '<!-- connector table -->' if connector.style != 'simple' else None,
-                    [html_line_breaks(connector.notes)]]
+                    '<!-- connector table -->' if connector.style != 'simple' else None]
+            if len(connector.additional_components) > 0:


Consider instead if connector.additional_components:

kvid · 2020-09-30T22:49:10Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+                    qty = extra.qty
+                    qty *= calculate_qty_multiplier_connector(extra.qty_multiplier, connector)


Consider joining these two lines into one:

qty = extra.qty * calculate_qty_multiplier_connector(extra.qty_multiplier, connector)

kvid · 2020-10-01T01:10:25Z

src/wireviz/wv_helper.py

+        raise ValueError(f'invalid qty multiplier parameter for connector {qty_multiplier}')
+
+
+def calculate_qty_multiplier_cable(qty_multiplier, cable):


Consider moving this function into the Cable class as a method:

def calculate_qty_multiplier(self, qty_multiplier: Optional[CableMultiplier]) -> float:

kvid · 2020-10-01T01:10:31Z

src/wireviz/wv_helper.py

+    if not qty_multiplier:
+        return 1
+
+    if qty_multiplier == 'wirecount':


Consider using elif like below for consistence.

src/wireviz/DataClasses.py

kvid · 2020-10-01T02:13:55Z

src/wireviz/DataClasses.py

+    pn: Optional[str] = None
+    qty: float = 1
+    unit: Optional[str] = None
+    qty_multiplier: Optional[str] = None


Consider appending a comment to this line:

# pincount | populated (for connectors), or wirecount | terminations | length | total_length (for cables)

Edit: However, an even better approach is to add the same information using type aliases that also can be used in other type annotations:

# from typing import Literal (New in Python 3.8) ConnectorMultiplier = str # = Literal['pincount', 'populated'] CableMultiplier = str # = Literal['wirecount', 'terminations', 'length', 'total_length'] @dataclass class AdditionalComponent: ... qty_multiplier: Union[ConnectorMultiplier, CableMultiplier, None] = None ... ... def calculate_qty_multiplier(self, qty_multiplier: Optional[ConnectorMultiplier]) -> int:

Note that the Literal type specifier is in comments to avoid requiring Python 3.8.

Tyler-Ward · 2020-10-01T23:06:06Z

Thanks for the additional suggestions, Have added them as well, I left the swapping from dict to dataclass code the same as it was for now as the one liner is a bit harder to read but happy to swap to that if other people think that is better.

kvid

Thank you again for accepting most of my suggestions. I also like that you argue against suggestions that might harm readability. I'm sorry for suggesting more changes so many times, but I often find it hard to see all improvement issues at once. Some issues become much easier too see after some other improvement steps have been done first. I've marked some comments with DRY for Don't Repeat Yourself because I prefer to avoid repeating the same code twice when it's possible to rewrite it to a loop, function call, or some other way to avoid code duplication without harming readability.

kvid · 2020-10-02T18:01:21Z

src/wireviz/DataClasses.py

+        name_subtype = f', {self.subtype}' if self.subtype else ''
+        return f'{self.type.capitalize()}{name_subtype}'


Consider joining the two lines into, e.g.

return self.type.capitalize() + (f', {self.subtype}' if self.subtype else '')

or slightly shorter, but maybe less readable:

return ', '.join(filter(None, [self.type.capitalize(), self.subtype]))

src/wireviz/DataClasses.py

kvid · 2020-10-02T18:46:23Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+            if connector.additional_components:
+                rows.append(["Additional components"])
+                for extra in connector.additional_components:
+                    qty = extra.qty * connector.get_qty_multiplier(extra.qty_multiplier)
+                    if(self.mini_bom_mode):
+                        id = self.get_bom_index(extra.description, extra.unit, extra.manufacturer, extra.mpn, extra.pn)
+                        rows.append(component_table_entry(f'{id} ({extra.type.capitalize()})', qty, extra.unit))
+                    else:
+                        rows.append(component_table_entry(extra.description, qty, extra.unit, extra.pn, extra.manufacturer, extra.mpn))


DRY: Consider moving these 9 lines above (plus suggested changes) into a new method and just call it from here:

Suggested change

if connector.additional_components:

rows.append(["Additional components"])

for extra in connector.additional_components:

qty = extra.qty * connector.get_qty_multiplier(extra.qty_multiplier)

if(self.mini_bom_mode):

id = self.get_bom_index(extra.description, extra.unit, extra.manufacturer, extra.mpn, extra.pn)

rows.append(component_table_entry(f'{id} ({extra.type.capitalize()})', qty, extra.unit))

else:

rows.append(component_table_entry(extra.description, qty, extra.unit, extra.pn, extra.manufacturer, extra.mpn))

rows.extend(self.additional_components_table_entries(connector))

kvid · 2020-10-04T01:10:06Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+                        id = self.get_bom_index(extra.description, extra.unit, extra.manufacturer, extra.mpn, extra.pn)
+                        rows.append(component_table_entry(f'{id} ({extra.type.capitalize()})', qty, extra.unit))


Personally, I would prefer some prefix to the BOM id number in the component table for increased readability,
e.g. '#', 'No ' or 'BOM Id ', but other users might disagree (e.g. maybe also different preferences in US and UK), and I suggest supporting all variations by accepting a user specified prefix as an optional string value in the mini_bom_mode parameter in addition to the current True and False values - similar to the cable.shield parameter values. I therefore suggest inserting this code just below the current assignment of the id variable:

if isinstance(self.mini_bom_mode, str): id = f'{self.mini_bom_mode}{id}'

The if self.mini_bom_mode: above will still work as intended for both bool and str values because a non-empty string prefix also evaluates to True.

I tested with the # and it looks much better than the number on its own, Im not sure if there is a huge amount to be gained by allowing the user to choose, given this would be the only place to have this customisation (unless i am missing anywhere). It might make sense to leave it out the customisation for now and add it later if it is uefull.

kvid · 2020-10-04T01:27:50Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+            items = [v for v in bom_items if bom_types_group(v) == group]
            shared = items[0]
-            designators = [i['designator'] for i in items]
+            designators = []
+            for item in items:
+                if item.get('designators'):
+                    if isinstance(item['designators'], List):
+                        designators.extend(item['designators'])
+                    else:
+                        designators.append(item['designators'])


I suggest renaming items to group_entries and item to inp to avoid any confusion with the BOM item column name.

kvid · 2020-10-04T01:28:50Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+            item = {'item': shared['item'], 'qty': round(total_qty, 3), 'unit': shared['unit'], 'designators': designators,
                    'manufacturer': shared['manufacturer'], 'mpn': shared['mpn'], 'pn': shared['pn']}
-            bom_cables.append(item)
-            bom_cables = sorted(bom_cables, key=lambda k: k['item'])  # sort list of dicts by their values (https://stackoverflow.com/a/73050)
-        bom.extend(bom_cables)
-
-        for item in self.additional_bom_items:
-            name = item['description'] if item.get('description', None) else ''
-            if isinstance(item.get('designators', None), List):
-                item['designators'].sort()  # sort designators if a list is provided
-            item = {'item': name, 'qty': item.get('qty', None), 'unit': item.get('unit', None), 'designators': item.get('designators', None),
-                    'manufacturer': item.get('manufacturer', None), 'mpn': item.get('mpn', None), 'pn': item.get('pn', None)}
-            bom_extra.append(item)
-        bom_extra = sorted(bom_extra, key=lambda k: k['item'])
-        bom.extend(bom_extra)
-        return bom
+            self._bom.append(item)


As above, I suggest using entry as BOM entry variable.

kvid · 2020-10-04T01:28:53Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+        for item in self._bom:
+            item["id"] = index


As above, I suggest using entry as BOM entry variable.

kvid · 2020-10-04T01:28:56Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+        for bom_item in self.bom():
+            if((bom_item['item'], bom_item['unit'], bom_item['manufacturer'], bom_item['mpn'], bom_item['pn']) == (item, unit, manufacturer, mpn, pn)):
+                return bom_item['id']


As above, I suggest using entry as BOM entry variable.

Please remove the outer parentheses from the if in this loop even if not accepting the whole suggestion below.

Edit: The rest of this suggestion doesn't hurt, but is probably not really needed if you ignore my other suggestion with all the issues.

Suggested change

for bom_item in self.bom():

if((bom_item['item'], bom_item['unit'], bom_item['manufacturer'], bom_item['mpn'], bom_item['pn']) == (item, unit, manufacturer, mpn, pn)):

return bom_item['id']

for entry in self.bom():

if tuple(entry.get(key) for key in ('item', 'unit', 'manufacturer', 'mpn', 'pn')) == (item, unit, manufacturer, mpn, pn):

return entry['id']

Using entry.get() to handle missing keys is needed if accepting suggestion using dict comprehension from additional_bom_items.

kvid · 2020-10-04T03:29:11Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+                        'manufacturer': part.manufacturer,
+                        'mpn': part.mpn,
+                        'pn': part.pn,
+                        'designators': cable.name


I assume it is a bug that this code line does not end with if cable.show_name else None as for connectors, but by using a common method, the bug should be fixed. Unless my assumption is wrong, this bug is a good example on the advantages with the DRY principle.

Cables didn't previously use the show_name field when generating the bom, however it is used by cables in the graph so makes sense to add to the bom code as well.

Tyler-Ward

No Problem, thanks for taking the time to keep reviewing. Some more good sugestions here, have implemented most of them and added comments on the others

Tyler-Ward · 2020-10-05T19:11:14Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+                rows.append(["Additional components"])
+                for extra in connector.additional_components:
+                    qty = extra.qty * connector.get_qty_multiplier(extra.qty_multiplier)
+                    if(self.mini_bom_mode):


I mostly program in c/c++ so if statement muscle memory that is likey the cause of that, now removed.

Tyler-Ward · 2020-10-05T20:25:19Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

-            items = [v for v in wirelist if wire_group(v) == group]
+        for cable in self.cables.values():
+            if not cable.ignore_in_bom:
+                # create name beilds used by both cables and bundles


Not quite sure how i made that typo but that should have been fields, now fixed

src/wireviz/Harness.py

Tyler-Ward · 2020-10-05T20:57:41Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+                        id = self.get_bom_index(extra.description, extra.unit, extra.manufacturer, extra.mpn, extra.pn)
+                        rows.append(component_table_entry(f'{id} ({extra.type.capitalize()})', qty, extra.unit))


I tested with the # and it looks much better than the number on its own, Im not sure if there is a huge amount to be gained by allowing the user to choose, given this would be the only place to have this customisation (unless i am missing anywhere). It might make sense to leave it out the customisation for now and add it later if it is uefull.

Tyler-Ward · 2020-10-05T21:00:35Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+                        'manufacturer': part.manufacturer,
+                        'mpn': part.mpn,
+                        'pn': part.pn,
+                        'designators': cable.name


Cables didn't previously use the show_name field when generating the bom, however it is used by cables in the graph so makes sense to add to the bom code as well.

kvid

Thank you once again for accepting most of my numerous suggestions. Please let me know when you are tired of improving details in this PR, and prefer raising a new issue to handle further improvements after merge-in, but please take a look at least at the two suggestions beginning with lines 441 and 448 of Harness.py.

Edit: I'm really glad you've managed to both add this useful feature with additional components and that you in the process also simplified the BOM generating code that will be a great benefit to other PRs. The owner wrote in #101 (comment) that he will finish the remaining PRs of v0.2 first, to avoid "feature creep", and then process the other PRs for v0.3. I suggested to him that your PR is a good candidate to start with, and hope he agrees when he arrives that stage. That means you should be prepared to rebase your PR branch on top of the new dev right after the v0.2 release. Thank you for all the good work!

Edit2: One of my code comments in this review is still tagged as Pending which I normally only see on comments before submitting the review, and I wonder if this comment was i fact submitted together with the rest of the review. Can you check if you see my comment as part of this review on line 343 of Harness.py with this contents:

It seems you forgot to remove these parentheses as mentioned in your Feature/additional components #115 (comment).

kvid · 2020-10-06T20:37:13Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+            rows.append(["Additional components"])
+            for extra in component.additional_components:
+                qty = extra.qty * component.get_qty_multiplier(extra.qty_multiplier)
+                if(self.mini_bom_mode):


It seems you forgot to remove these parentheses as mentioned in your #115 (comment).

kvid · 2020-10-06T20:44:39Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+            bom_entries.append(
+                {
+                    'item': part.description,
+                    'qty': qty,
+                    'unit': part.unit,
+                    'manufacturer': part.manufacturer,
+                    'mpn': part.mpn,
+                    'pn': part.pn,
+                    'designators': component.name if component.show_name else None
+                }
+            )


Suggested change

bom_entries.append(

{

'item': part.description,

'qty': qty,

'unit': part.unit,

'manufacturer': part.manufacturer,

'mpn': part.mpn,

'pn': part.pn,

'designators': component.name if component.show_name else None

}

)

bom_entries.append({

'item': part.description,

'qty': qty,

'unit': part.unit,

'manufacturer': part.manufacturer,

'mpn': part.mpn,

'pn': part.pn,

'designators': component.name if component.show_name else None

})

Why not use the same compact style as you use in the bom() method below?

kvid · 2020-10-07T13:36:39Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+        for bom_item in self.bom():
+            if((bom_item['item'], bom_item['unit'], bom_item['manufacturer'], bom_item['mpn'], bom_item['pn']) == (item, unit, manufacturer, mpn, pn)):
+                return bom_item['id']


Please remove the outer parentheses from the if in this loop even if not accepting the whole suggestion below.

Edit: The rest of this suggestion doesn't hurt, but is probably not really needed if you ignore my other suggestion with all the issues.

Suggested change

for bom_item in self.bom():

if((bom_item['item'], bom_item['unit'], bom_item['manufacturer'], bom_item['mpn'], bom_item['pn']) == (item, unit, manufacturer, mpn, pn)):

return bom_item['id']

for entry in self.bom():

if tuple(entry.get(key) for key in ('item', 'unit', 'manufacturer', 'mpn', 'pn')) == (item, unit, manufacturer, mpn, pn):

return entry['id']

Using entry.get() to handle missing keys is needed if accepting suggestion using dict comprehension from additional_bom_items.

kvid · 2020-10-07T14:41:33Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+            self._bom.append({
+                'item': shared['item'], 'qty': round(total_qty, 3), 'unit': shared['unit'], 'designators': designators,
+                'manufacturer': shared['manufacturer'], 'mpn': shared['mpn'], 'pn': shared['pn']
+            })


Suggested change

self._bom.append({

'item': shared['item'], 'qty': round(total_qty, 3), 'unit': shared['unit'], 'designators': designators,

'manufacturer': shared['manufacturer'], 'mpn': shared['mpn'], 'pn': shared['pn']

})

self._bom.append({**group_entries[0], 'qty': round(total_qty, 3), 'designators': designators})

kvid · 2020-10-07T15:04:39Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+        bom_types_group = lambda bt: (bt['item'], bt['unit'], bt['manufacturer'], bt['mpn'], bt['pn'])
+        for group in Counter([bom_types_group(v) for v in bom_entries]):
+            group_entries = [v for v in bom_entries if bom_types_group(v) == group]
+            shared = group_entries[0]


Suggested change

shared = group_entries[0]

If accepting my other suggestion that removes all usage of this variable, then it's no longer needed.

kvid · 2020-10-07T15:07:03Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+                        designators.append(group_entry['designators'])
+            designators = list(dict.fromkeys(designators))  # remove duplicates
+            designators.sort()
+            total_qty = sum(i['qty'] for i in group_entries)


Suggested change

total_qty = sum(i['qty'] for i in group_entries)

total_qty = sum(e['qty'] for e in group_entries)

I suggest using e or entry as loop variable here.

kvid · 2020-10-07T16:25:25Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

        for item in self.additional_bom_items:
-            name = item['description'] if item.get('description', None) else ''
-            if isinstance(item.get('designators', None), List):
-                item['designators'].sort()  # sort designators if a list is provided
-            item = {'item': name, 'qty': item.get('qty', None), 'unit': item.get('unit', None), 'designators': item.get('designators', None),
-                    'manufacturer': item.get('manufacturer', None), 'mpn': item.get('mpn', None), 'pn': item.get('pn', None)}
-            bom_extra.append(item)
-        bom_extra = sorted(bom_extra, key=lambda k: k['item'])
-        bom.extend(bom_extra)
-        return bom
+            bom_entries.append({
+                'item': item.get('description', ''), 'qty': item.get('qty'), 'unit': item.get('unit'), 'designators': item.get('designators'),
+                'manufacturer': item.get('manufacturer'), 'mpn': item.get('mpn'), 'pn': item.get('pn')
+            })


Edit: This suggestion have too many issues and is not worth the effort at this stage I now believe after thinking a bit more. I'm really sorry for the extra noise. You can safely ignore this.

The whole loop above can be replaced with one of the alternative one-liners below, but there are some issues that might stop you from accepting them:

bom_entries.extend([{**entry, 'item': entry.get('description', '')} for entry in self.additional_bom_items])

or

bom_entries.extend([{k.replace('description', 'item'): v for k, v in entry.items()} for entry in self.additional_bom_items])

If we in the code rename the 'item' key to 'description' in all BOM entry dicts (the column header can still be kept as 'Item' if needed), then it would be even simpler and more consistent, but I'm not sure if such a change might be out of scope for this PR:

bom_entries.extend(self.additional_bom_items)

Three are some minor issues with each of these three alternative one-liners:

The dict entries produced by the first alternative have an extra 'description' value that is never used. It's not hard to remove it, but is it worth complicating the code for that as long as the extra dict value in memory does not affect any output?

The item/description values produced by the second and third alternatives might be absent if not present in the input YAML. If that might be a problem, it can be fixed in the deduplication part below.

All alternatives might produce entries where some of the keys are absent if not present in the input YAML. See the two suggestions about using get() in bom_types_group and get_bom_index() to handle absent keys.

src/wireviz/Harness.py

kvid · 2020-10-08T22:06:38Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+        index = 1
+        for item in self._bom:
+            item["id"] = index
+            index += 1


Suggested change

index = 1

for item in self._bom:

item["id"] = index

index += 1

self._bom = [{**entry, 'id': index} for index, entry in enumerate(self._bom, 1)]

kvid · 2020-10-09T01:29:07Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+            })
+
+        # deduplicate bom
+        bom_types_group = lambda bt: (bt['item'], bt['unit'], bt['manufacturer'], bt['mpn'], bt['pn'])


Edit: This suggestion doesn't hurt, but is not really needed if you ignore my other suggestion with all the issues.

Suggested change

bom_types_group = lambda bt: (bt['item'], bt['unit'], bt['manufacturer'], bt['mpn'], bt['pn'])

bom_types_group = lambda bt: tuple(bt.get(key) for key in ('item', 'unit', 'manufacturer', 'mpn', 'pn'))

Using bt.get() to handle missing keys is needed if accepting suggestion using dict comprehension from additional_bom_items.

formatc1702 · 2020-10-17T19:45:25Z

Progress on this PR looks fantastic, thank you guys for your heavy work so far.
@Tyler-Ward, I hope you're able to include @kvid's latest suggestions soon!

Fair warning: I might have 1-2 little nit-picks as well before I merge, but @kvid has done the heavy lifting and overall, this looks very good!

Tyler-Ward

I have added the majority of the suggestions above, excluding the one that was sigested to skip and the one commented on below which has highlighted some bugs that need fixing which I will sort tomorrow.

Thank you once again for accepting most of my numerous suggestions. Please let me know when you are tired of improving details in this PR, and prefer raising a new issue to handle further improvements after merge-in, but please take a look at least at the two suggestions beginning with lines 441 and 448 of Harness.py.

Thanks for the additional suggestions, Happy to keep on making edits now if there are further things to improve. or for them to be split into seperate tickets.

Edit2: One of my code comments in this review is still tagged as Pending which I normally only see on comments before submitting the review, and I wonder if this comment was i fact submitted together with the rest of the review. Can you check if you see my comment as part of this review on line 343 of Harness.py with this contents:

That appears for me and has been fixed (along with a couple of others)

src/wireviz/Harness.py

kvid

Thank you for accepting most of my suggestions again. Se my suggested solution to the problem you describe. I haven't had time to look at the other modifications you made yet.

src/wireviz/Harness.py

kvid · 2020-10-18T13:18:45Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+
+    def get_bom_index(self, item, unit, manufacturer, mpn, pn):
+        for entry in self.bom():
+            if(entry['item'], entry['unit'], entry['manufacturer'], entry['mpn'], entry['pn']) == (item, unit, manufacturer, mpn, pn):


Suggested change

if(entry['item'], entry['unit'], entry['manufacturer'], entry['mpn'], entry['pn']) == (item, unit, manufacturer, mpn, pn):

if (entry['item'], entry['unit'], entry['manufacturer'], entry['mpn'], entry['pn']) == tuple(clean_whitespace(v) for v in (item, unit, manufacturer, mpn, pn)):

kvid · 2020-10-18T13:19:53Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

@@ -426,5 +466,6 @@ def bom_list(self):
            item_list = [item.get(key, '') for key in keys]  # fill missing values with blanks
            item_list = [', '.join(subitem) if isinstance(subitem, List) else subitem for subitem in item_list]  # convert any lists into comma separated strings
            item_list = ['' if subitem is None else subitem for subitem in item_list]  # if a field is missing for some (but not all) BOM items
+            item_list = [remove_line_breaks(subitem) for subitem in item_list]  # remove line breaks if present


If my other suggestion solves your problem, then this can be removed:

Suggested change

item_list = [remove_line_breaks(subitem) for subitem in item_list] # remove line breaks if present

Tyler-Ward · 2020-10-18T13:52:11Z

That would catch some of the issues, the one I found that is easiest to end up in however is the following where a space is added before a comma. we could add code to replace any space comma combinations with a single comma, not sure if that would cause any other issues but can investigate that later today.

Below is a section of a bom where the connector type was split into two lines

Id	Item	Qty	Unit	Designators	P/N	Manufacturer	MPN
3	Connector, Molex Micro-Fit , female, 5 pins	2		X2, X3	MF3.0-5	Molex	436450500
4	Connector, Molex Micro-Fit, female, 5 pins	1		ZZ	MF3.0-5	Molex	436450500

kvid · 2020-10-18T16:01:47Z

That would catch some of the issues, the one I found that is easiest to end up in however is the following where a space is added before a comma. we could add code to replace any space comma combinations with a single comma, not sure if that would cause any other issues but can investigate that later today.

Please share the YAML input that provoke the undesired output.

Below is a section of a bom where the connector type was split into two lines

Id Item Qty Unit Designators P/N Manufacturer MPN
3 Connector, Molex Micro-Fit , female, 5 pins 2 X2, X3 MF3.0-5 Molex 436450500
4 Connector, Molex Micro-Fit, female, 5 pins 1 ZZ MF3.0-5 Molex 436450500

I assume the first of these two entries was produced by specifying additional_components for X2 and X3. Am I right? In that case, the problem is caused by the comma added in AdditionalComponent.description(). I suggest calling clean_whitespace() on the attribute that is concatenated to the comma separator without a space between, i.e.:

    @property
    def description(self) -> str:
        return clean_whitespace(self.type.capitalize()) + (f', {self.subtype}' if self.subtype else '')

I could not find any other code that concatenated a string attribute with a non-space separator before inserting into Harness.bom_entries.

Edit: This means all newlines in AdditionalComponent.type will be ignored also in the diagram. I that is undesired, then we probably only should remove any trailing whitespace before the comma separator in this property function.

Tyler-Ward · 2020-10-18T16:12:33Z

The yaml that generated that bom is included at the end of the post (probably not the best test case in its current form but can be turned into one).

The error is with the bom line for the connector itself (X2 and X3) where the type was split into two lines. ZZ is a aditional bom item that matches the output of a connector without a linebreak in its type. The extra space is added before the comma because the trailing newline is kept when the description string is built from the component variables (line 374 in the current state).

connectors:
  X1:
    type: Powerpole
    pinlabels: [GND, VCC]
    ignore_in_bom: true
    additional_components:
      -
        type: housing
        subtype: Anderson Powerpole 15/45, Black
        qty: 1
        manufacturer: Anderson
        mpn: 1327G6
        pn: powerpole-black
      -
        type: housing
        subtype: Anderson Powerpole 15/45, Red
        qty: 1
        manufacturer: Anderson
        mpn: 1327
        pn: powerpole-red
      -
        type: crimp
        subtype: Anderson Powerpole 15/45, 30A
        qty_multiplier: pincount
        manufacturer: Anderson
        mpn: 1331
        pn: powerpole-crimp-30A
    notes: "notes go here"
  X2: &mf3-5
    type: |
      Molex
      Micro-Fit
    subtype: female
    pinlabels: [GND, VCC, A, B, C]
    mpn: 436450500
    manufacturer: Molex
    pn: MF3.0-5
    additional_components:
      -
        type: crimp
        qty_multiplier: populated
        manufacturer: Molex
        mpn: 43030-0007
        pn: MF3.0-Crimp

  X3:
    <<: *mf3-5

  F1:
    style: simple
    autogenerate: true
    type: Crimp ferrule
    subtype: 0.5 mm²
    color: OG # optional color
    additional_components:
      -
        type: crimp housing

cables:
  W1: &wire_power # define template
    colors: [BK, RD] # number of wires implicit in color list
    gauge: 0.25 # assume mm2 if no gauge unit is specified
    show_equiv: true
    length: 0.2
    mpn: 123456

  W2:
    <<: *wire_power
    additional_components:
      -
        type: |
            Sleve
        subtype: |
            Braided nylon,
            black, 3mm
        qty_multiplier: length
        unit: m
        pn: SLV-1

  W3:
    <<: *wire_power

connections:
  -
    - X1: [1-2]
    - W1: [1-2]
    - X2: [1-2]
  -
    - X1: [1-2]
    - W2: [1-2]
    - X3: [1-2]
  -
    - X1: [1-2]
    - W3: [1-2]
    - F1

additional_bom_items:
  - # define an additional item to add to the bill of materials (does not appear in graph)
    description: |
        Connector,
        Molex Micro-Fit, female, 5 pins
    qty: 1
    designators:
      - ZZ
    manufacturer: Molex
    mpn: 436450500
    pn: MF3.0-5

kvid · 2020-10-18T17:11:16Z

The yaml that generated that bom is included at the end of the post (probably not the best test case in its current form but can be turned into one).

Thank's for sharing. I believe it's a good candidate for future regression tests - you can suggest an improved version when you have the time.

The error is with the bom line for the connector itself (X2 and X3) where the type was split into two lines. ZZ is a aditional bom item that matches the output of a connector without a linebreak in its type. The extra space is added before the comma because the trailing newline is kept when the description string is built from the component variables (line 374 in the current state).

You are right. That means we need the same here: Calling clean_whitespace() separately on all the attribute that might be concatenated to the comma separator without a space between, i.e. connector.type, connector.subtype, and cable.type. (More or less your alternative 3.)

A better alternative is then to expand clean_whitespace() (as you suggested in #115 (comment)) instead of these separate calls (including the separate call in the property method I suggested earlier today):

def clean_whitespace(inp):
    return ' '.join(inp.split()).replace(' ,', ',') if isinstance(inp, str) else inp

In any case, my other suggestions should still be valid (except the separate call in AdditionalComponent.description() if you accept expanding clean_whitespace()).

I assume comma is the only non-space separator that can cause such problems...

Also refine bom variable names and fix a comple of typos

unit is set to emptystring which doesen't deduplicate with the none present when unit is not set

Tyler-Ward · 2020-10-18T23:45:55Z

I have looked through the fields that support newlines and in the bom they are all folowed by a comma or a space so that whitespace cleanup function will work and has been added.

I have rebased ontop of the latest dev to fix the merge conflict and also added the new syntax additions to the documentation.

kvid

Thank you for accepting some of my suggestions again, and for rebasing on top of the new dev.

kvid · 2020-10-19T18:33:23Z

src/wireviz/DataClasses.py

+
+    @property
+    def description(self) -> str:
+        return self.type.capitalize().strip() + (f', {self.subtype.strip()}' if self.subtype else '')


I suggest reversing your latest changes here to remove the two .strip() calls:

Suggested change

return self.type.capitalize().strip() + (f', {self.subtype.strip()}' if self.subtype else '')

return self.type.capitalize() + (f', {self.subtype}' if self.subtype else '')

I assume this was one of the things you tried to avoid space before comma in the BOM.

Now, when you remove those spaces in clean_whitespace(), no such actions should be needed here.

The only reason for the user to include newlines, is to adapt the text in the diagram, and then we shouldn't remove it in the diagram without a very good reason. It's better to let the user see the consequence if it was a mistake, and then he can remove it from the input.

This is needed to avoid some graphicial odities in the diagram. Without the strip if either string is a multiline string (defined with | as in the examples) a traling newline is added which causes issues when the fields are joined together in the cell. Most of the other cells ignore this problem as the trailing
is ignored by graphvis.

removing them and generating the diagram gives

with mini bom

without mini bom

The alternatives could be either getting user to use the |- symbol instead (should update the docs in this case). or moving the cleanup of the <br />,, <br />) and <br /><br /> into the render code for the additional components cells.

In this case I'd argue having that little .rstrip() is nicer than requiring |- in the input YAML.

My question is, where does the need for .capitalize() come from?
Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't see a need to mess with the user-defined type attribute. This applies to all instances of this function call.

The capitialise was originaly added to create more consistent bom formatting. We can remove this and pass that requirment onto the user if they care about it as this would be fairly intuative for a user to know what to change (unlike the newlines).

I agree with your decision to remove the .capitalize(). Personally, I think I would have preferred recommending |- in the doc before removing the trailing newline with .rstrip(), but I understand that others might have a different opinion. The only motivation for a user to use | when specifying this attribute is to insert newlines, and then it shouldn't be too much of a surprise seeing the results above. If we in the Multiline section of the doc write "recommend |- to avoid a trailing newline", that should be enough, IMHO, but I respect that you disagree. No hard feelings. 😄

src/wireviz/Harness.py

kvid · 2020-10-19T18:58:19Z

src/wireviz/wv_helper.py

+            output += manufacturer_str
+    output = html_line_breaks(output)
+    # format the above output as left aligned text in a single visable cell
+    return f'<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="3" cellborder="1"><tr><td align="left" balign="left">{output}</td></tr></table>'


Did you reject this suggestion or just didn't see it?

tutorial/tutorial08.yml

kvid · 2020-10-19T19:17:36Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+        # Remove linebreaks and clean whitespace of values in search
+        target = tuple(clean_whitespace(v) for v in (item, unit, manufacturer, mpn, pn))
+        for entry in self.bom():
+            if(entry['item'], entry['unit'], entry['manufacturer'], entry['mpn'], entry['pn']) == target:


I suggest inserting a single space after if as in all the other if-statements:

Suggested change

if(entry['item'], entry['unit'], entry['manufacturer'], entry['mpn'], entry['pn']) == target:

if (entry['item'], entry['unit'], entry['manufacturer'], entry['mpn'], entry['pn']) == target:

kvid · 2020-10-19T19:35:00Z

src/wireviz/Harness.py

+                qty = extra.qty * component.get_qty_multiplier(extra.qty_multiplier)
+                if self.mini_bom_mode:
+                    id = self.get_bom_index(extra.description, extra.unit, extra.manufacturer, extra.mpn, extra.pn)
+                    rows.append(component_table_entry(f'#{id} ({extra.type.capitalize().strip()})', qty, extra.unit))


I suggest reversing your latest changes here to remove the .strip() call:

Suggested change

rows.append(component_table_entry(f'#{id} ({extra.type.capitalize().strip()})', qty, extra.unit))

rows.append(component_table_entry(f'#{id} ({extra.type.capitalize()})', qty, extra.unit))

I assume this was one of the things you tried to avoid space before comma in the BOM.

Now, when you remove those spaces in clean_whitespace(), no such actions should be needed here.

The only reason for the user to include newlines, is to adapt the text in the diagram, and then we shouldn't remove it in the diagram without a very good reason. It's better to let the user see the consequence if it was a mistake, and then he can remove it from the input.

kvid · 2020-10-19T20:14:02Z

src/wireviz/wv_helper.py

 def remove_line_breaks(inp):
    return inp.replace('\n', ' ').strip() if isinstance(inp, str) else inp


I suggest removing the no longer used functions graphviz_line_breaks() and remove_line_breaks() above.

formatc1702 · 2020-10-20T20:18:51Z

src/wireviz/DataClasses.py

+ConnectorMultiplier = str  # = Literal['pincount', 'populated']
+CableMultiplier = str  # = Literal['wirecount', 'terminations', 'length', 'total_length']
+


Any reason the Literals are commented out?

from @kvid's comment #115 (comment)

Note that the Literal type specifier is in comments to avoid requiring Python 3.8.

I have checked my 2.7 install and literals aernt supported, doing some searching I cant find any reference to this method of specifying literals so not sure if this is a standard implementation method or not.

Understood. Let's keep it like this then, perhaps add a comment behind the comment explaining this.

New in version 3.8 is specified by https://docs.python.org/3/library/typing.html#typing.Literal

Tyler-Ward · 2020-10-20T21:35:08Z

Thanks for the additional suggestions, I believe all of them have now been implemented or decided against in the inline comments but let me know if I have missed any.

formatc1702 · 2020-10-21T11:05:26Z

Once there are no further comments, I will likely squash this PR into a single commit, unless @Tyler-Ward wants to go through the trouble (not worth it IMHO) of compressing the current 30 commits into something more manageable with meaningful intermediate steps.
@kvid since you've been keeping an eye on the implementation, I will rely on your GO to proceed with the squash+merge.

kvid

Thank you for accepting more suggestions. As far as I can see now, you have either implemented or decided against all my suggestions. I provided a link to the documentation of Literal that you couldn't find in that code comment thread, and explained why I would prefer recommending |- before calling .rstrip(), but that I also respect your opinion.

Thank you for the fantastic effort to develop this PR with the useful feature and improving the BOM code in the process. I'm also impressed by your patience to process my numerous suggestions about details.

This way, both BOM and harness.additional_bom_items uses the same set of keys in their dict entries. This was originally suggested in a wireviz#115 review, but had too many issues to be implemented then.

* Skip assignment and return expression directly * Simplify get_bom_index() parameters - Use the actual BOM as first parameter instead of the whole harness. - Use a whole AdditionalComponent as second parameter instead of each attribute separately. * Use the same lambda in get_bom_index() as for deduplicating BOM Move the lambda declaration out of the function scope for common access from two different functions. * Convert dataclass object to dict to use the same lambda * Redefine the common lambda to an ordinary function * Simplify BOM header row logic * Simplify collecting designators for a joined BOM entry Assign input designators once to a temporary variable for easy reusage. * Simplify deduplication and sorting of collected designators * Remove parentheses around return expressions https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4978567/should-a-return-statement-have-parentheses * Move out code from inner loop into helper functions * Move BOM sorting above grouping to use groupby() - Use one common entry loop to consume iterator only once. - Use same key function for sort() and groupby(), except replace None with empty string when sorting. * Make the BOM grouping function return string tuple for sorting * Use a generator expressions and raise exception if failing Seems to be the most popular search alternative: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/8653516/python-list-of-dictionaries-search Raising StopIteration if not found is better than returning None to detect such an internal error more easily. * Replace accumulation loop with sum expressions Make a list from the group iterator for reusage in sum expressions and to pick first group entry. The expected group sizes are very small, so performance loss by creating a temporary list should be neglectable. Alternativly, itertools.tee(group, 3) could be called to triplicate the iterator, but it was not chosen for readability reasons. * Add function type hints and doc strings * Add BOMEntry type alias This type alias describes the possible types of keys and values in the dict representing a BOM entry. * Rename extra variable to part for consistency * Build output string in one big expression Build output string in component_table_entry() as the similar strings in generate_bom(). Repeating a couple of minor if-expressions is small cost to obtain a more compact and readable main expression. * Move default qty value=1 to BOM deduplication * Eliminate local variable * Rename the 'item' key to 'description' in all BOMEntry dicts This way, both BOM and harness.additional_bom_items uses the same set of keys in their dict entries. This was originally suggested in a #115 review, but had too many issues to be implemented then. * Move repeated code into new optional_fields() function * Group common function arguments into a dict * Revert "Use a generator expressions and raise exception if failing" This reverts commit 96d393d. However, raising an exception if failing the BOM index search is still wanted, so a custom exception is raised instead of returning None. * Use new BOMKey type alias for get_bom_index() target argument Replace the get_bom_index() part argument with the target key argument to prepare for quering any BOM entry that matches the target key. * Cache the BOM entry key in the entry itself * Rename bom_types_group() to bom_entry_key() * Define tuples of BOM columns as common constants * Clarify a comment * Change BOM heading from `Item` to `Description` Co-authored-by: kvid <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Daniel Rojas <[email protected]>

formatc1702 added this to the v0.3 milestone Jul 21, 2020

kvid mentioned this pull request Jul 29, 2020

[feature] Connector-Connector & Connector-Ferrule mating #134

Open

kvid mentioned this pull request Sep 13, 2020

Syntax documentation + new /docs directory #111

Merged

Tyler-Ward force-pushed the feature/additional_components branch from ac4ebfc to e744f38 Compare September 17, 2020 22:13

Tyler-Ward mentioned this pull request Sep 17, 2020

[RFC]Merge the additional BoM item lines if having matching name with a connector in the cable #166

Closed

Tyler-Ward marked this pull request as ready for review September 26, 2020 14:06

kvid requested changes Sep 27, 2020

View reviewed changes

kvid requested changes Oct 1, 2020

View reviewed changes

kvid requested changes Oct 4, 2020

View reviewed changes

kvid reviewed Oct 4, 2020

View reviewed changes

kvid mentioned this pull request Oct 4, 2020

[meta] Collaborator discussion #101

Open

Tyler-Ward commented Oct 6, 2020

View reviewed changes

kvid requested changes Oct 9, 2020

View reviewed changes

Tyler-Ward commented Oct 17, 2020

View reviewed changes

src/wireviz/Harness.py Show resolved Hide resolved

kvid requested changes Oct 18, 2020

View reviewed changes

Tyler-Ward added 2 commits October 19, 2020 00:19

Add bom ignore option for cables and connectors

389e480

Add connector aditional bom components

84c9db6

Tyler-Ward added 7 commits October 19, 2020 00:28

Make description for additional components a property

a450c82

Deduplicate additional components functions

cb3e3f4

Also refine bom variable names and fix a comple of typos

Moved bom entry description generation to be in order of aperance

b7f184e

Remove brackets arround if statements and shorten bom dict opperatiions

715fe36

Fix issue with deduplication of connectors.

e6c21bd

unit is set to emptystring which doesen't deduplicate with the none present when unit is not set

Improve multiline field handling to avoid unwanted spaces

5e0827b

Add additional_components to the syntax documentation.

f128ea2

Tyler-Ward force-pushed the feature/additional_components branch from 224b7f2 to f128ea2 Compare October 18, 2020 23:33

kvid requested changes Oct 19, 2020

View reviewed changes

kvid mentioned this pull request Oct 19, 2020

[feature] Accept optional (and overridable) harness attribute(s) #158

Closed

formatc1702 reviewed Oct 20, 2020

View reviewed changes

Remove unused functions and code formatting tweaks

052348c

Tyler-Ward mentioned this pull request Oct 20, 2020

[bug] Bundles to have consistent part number fields #183

Open

Remove aditional component type capitilisation and swap to rstrip.

4eeff65

kvid approved these changes Oct 21, 2020

View reviewed changes

formatc1702 merged commit e85ee5d into wireviz:dev Oct 22, 2020

formatc1702 added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 22, 2020

Cherry-pick updates from #115 by @Tyler-Ward

fbc3511

formatc1702 added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 22, 2020

Add #50, #115

9354eb2

Tyler-Ward mentioned this pull request Oct 22, 2020

[ci] Include a set of input files for regression testing #63

Open

This was referenced Oct 22, 2020

[feature] More control over wire parameters #56

Open

Add href attribute to connectors, cables, and additional_bom_items #168

Draft

formatc1702 mentioned this pull request Nov 1, 2020

Update the types of dataclass attributes according to usage #163

Merged

kvid mentioned this pull request Dec 21, 2020

[Feature] Crimp ferrule direct to connector #204

Closed

kvid mentioned this pull request Sep 1, 2023

Large scale refactoring #251

Open

5 tasks

		elif extra['qty_multiplier'] == 'length':
		qty *= cable.length

		output = f'<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="3" cellborder="1"><tr><td align="left" balign="left">{output}</td></tr></table>'
		return output

		qty = extra.qty
		qty *= calculate_qty_multiplier_connector(extra.qty_multiplier, connector)

		raise ValueError(f'invalid qty multiplier parameter for connector {qty_multiplier}')


		def calculate_qty_multiplier_cable(qty_multiplier, cable):

		name_subtype = f', {self.subtype}' if self.subtype else ''
		return f'{self.type.capitalize()}{name_subtype}'

		id = self.get_bom_index(extra.description, extra.unit, extra.manufacturer, extra.mpn, extra.pn)
		rows.append(component_table_entry(f'{id} ({extra.type.capitalize()})', qty, extra.unit))

	total_qty = sum(i['qty'] for i in group_entries)
	total_qty = sum(e['qty'] for e in group_entries)

	bom_types_group = lambda bt: (bt['item'], bt['unit'], bt['manufacturer'], bt['mpn'], bt['pn'])
	bom_types_group = lambda bt: tuple(bt.get(key) for key in ('item', 'unit', 'manufacturer', 'mpn', 'pn'))

	if(entry['item'], entry['unit'], entry['manufacturer'], entry['mpn'], entry['pn']) == (item, unit, manufacturer, mpn, pn):
	if (entry['item'], entry['unit'], entry['manufacturer'], entry['mpn'], entry['pn']) == tuple(clean_whitespace(v) for v in (item, unit, manufacturer, mpn, pn)):

	return self.type.capitalize().strip() + (f', {self.subtype.strip()}' if self.subtype else '')
	return self.type.capitalize() + (f', {self.subtype}' if self.subtype else '')

	rows.append(component_table_entry(f'#{id} ({extra.type.capitalize().strip()})', qty, extra.unit))
	rows.append(component_table_entry(f'#{id} ({extra.type.capitalize()})', qty, extra.unit))

		def remove_line_breaks(inp):
		return inp.replace('\n', ' ').strip() if isinstance(inp, str) else inp

		ConnectorMultiplier = str # = Literal['pincount', 'populated']
		CableMultiplier = str # = Literal['wirecount', 'terminations', 'length', 'total_length']

Feature/additional components #115

Feature/additional components #115

Conversation

Tyler-Ward commented Jul 20, 2020

Tyler-Ward commented Jul 21, 2020

formatc1702 commented Jul 22, 2020

formatc1702 commented Jul 22, 2020 • edited Loading

formatc1702 commented Jul 22, 2020

Tyler-Ward commented Sep 20, 2020

Tyler-Ward commented Sep 26, 2020

kvid left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kvid Sep 26, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Tyler-Ward commented Sep 29, 2020

kvid left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kvid Oct 1, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kvid Oct 1, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Tyler-Ward commented Oct 1, 2020

kvid left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kvid Oct 2, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kvid Oct 4, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kvid Oct 7, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kvid Oct 4, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Tyler-Ward left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kvid left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kvid Oct 7, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kvid Oct 7, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kvid Oct 9, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

formatc1702 commented Oct 17, 2020

Tyler-Ward left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kvid left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Tyler-Ward commented Oct 18, 2020

formatc1702 commented Jul 22, 2020 •

edited

Loading

kvid Sep 26, 2020 •

edited

Loading

kvid left a comment •

edited

Loading

kvid Oct 1, 2020 •

edited

Loading

kvid Oct 1, 2020 •

edited

Loading

kvid Oct 2, 2020 •

edited

Loading

kvid Oct 4, 2020 •

edited

Loading

kvid Oct 7, 2020 •

edited

Loading

kvid Oct 4, 2020 •

edited

Loading

kvid left a comment •

edited

Loading

kvid Oct 7, 2020 •

edited

Loading

kvid Oct 7, 2020 •

edited

Loading

kvid Oct 9, 2020 •

edited

Loading

kvid commented Oct 18, 2020 •

edited

Loading

kvid commented Oct 18, 2020 •

edited

Loading

Tyler-Ward Oct 20, 2020 •

edited

Loading

kvid Oct 20, 2020 •

edited

Loading