emptyrivers / archivist Goto Github PK

see: rossnichols/LibSerialize#4 & SafeteeWoW/LibDeflate#6 (neato)

pros: interactions which don't need to be snappy can be put on the back burner, migration can have less risk of smashing against the script timout boundary
cons: more complex, boring to write

should probably do it

wtb robust dependency resolution pls

oops. parsing a key/value should only consume up to the next key/value marker, or object separator for values

Using your branch from WeakAuras/WeakAuras2#2067
When typing /wa repair i get this error

1x WeakAuras\Libs\Archivist\Archivist.lua:555: Encountered unexpected token type while parsing object. Expected "KEY" but got "VALUE".
[string "=[C]"]: in function `error'
[string "@WeakAuras\Libs\Archivist\Archivist.lua"]:53: in function `Assert'
[string "@WeakAuras\Libs\Archivist\Archivist.lua"]:555: in function <WeakAuras\Libs\Archivist\Archivist.lua:533>
[string "@WeakAuras\Libs\Archivist\Archivist.lua"]:574: in function `DeArchive'
[string "@WeakAuras\Libs\Archivist\Archivist.lua"]:299: in function <WeakAuras\Libs\Archivist\Archivist.lua:290>
[string "=(tail call)"]: ?
[string "=(tail call)"]: ?
[string "@WeakAuras\ArchiveTypes\Repository.lua"]:56: in function <WeakAuras\ArchiveTypes\Repository.lua:52>
[string "=(tail call)"]: ?
[string "=(tail call)"]: ?
[string "@WeakAuras\WeakAuras-@[email protected]"]:2824: in function <WeakAuras\WeakAuras.lua:2818>

SavedVariables.zip

The current implementation of the Archivist:DeleteAll(storeType) function nils out the named store table in self.sv when a store type is explicitly passed. This leads to the rest of Archivist breaking if you then call other functions for the store type that was just deleted.

If called without an explicit store type the self.sv entries for each store type aren't nilled out and are instead replaced with empty tables, leaving Archivist functioning fine when other functions are called.

Very basic test case:

Archivist:Initialize({});
print(Archivist.sv.ReadOnly);
Archivist:DeleteAll("ReadOnly");
print(Archivist.sv.ReadOnly);
Archivist:Create("ReadOnly", "TestStore", ":)");  -- Error! :(
print(Archivist.sv.ReadOnly.TestStore);

This will throw the following error once it calls the Create function:

4x SecretProject\Libs\Archivist\Archivist.lua:200: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value)
[string "@SecretProject\Libs\Archivist\Archivist.lua"]:200: in function `Create'

Compared to the alternative of not passing a store name, no error occurs:

Archivist:Initialize({});
print(Archivist.sv.ReadOnly);
Archivist:DeleteAll();
print(Archivist.sv.ReadOnly);
Archivist:Create("ReadOnly", "TestStore", ":)");
print(Archivist.sv.ReadOnly.TestStore);