cpython/Lib/plat-mac/plistlib.py

470 lines
15 KiB
Python
Raw Normal View History

"""plistlib.py -- a tool to generate and parse MacOSX .plist files.
The PropertList (.plist) file format is a simple XML pickle supporting
basic object types, like dictionaries, lists, numbers and strings.
Usually the top level object is a dictionary.
To write out a plist file, use the writePlist(rootObject, pathOrFile)
function. 'rootObject' is the top level object, 'pathOrFile' is a
filename or a (writable) file object.
To parse a plist from a file, use the readPlist(pathOrFile) function,
with a file name or a (readable) file object as the only argument. It
returns the top level object (again, usually a dictionary).
To work with plist data in strings, you can use readPlistFromString()
and writePlistToString().
Values can be strings, integers, floats, booleans, tuples, lists,
dictionaries, Data or datetime.datetime objects. String values (including
dictionary keys) may be unicode strings -- they will be written out as
UTF-8.
The <data> plist type is supported through the Data class. This is a
thin wrapper around a Python string.
Generate Plist example:
pl = dict(
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
aString="Doodah",
aList=["A", "B", 12, 32.1, [1, 2, 3]],
aFloat = 0.1,
anInt = 728,
aDict=dict(
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
anotherString="<hello & hi there!>",
aUnicodeValue=u'M\xe4ssig, Ma\xdf',
aTrueValue=True,
aFalseValue=False,
),
someData = Data("<binary gunk>"),
someMoreData = Data("<lots of binary gunk>" * 10),
aDate = datetime.datetime.fromtimestamp(time.mktime(time.gmtime())),
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
)
# unicode keys are possible, but a little awkward to use:
pl[u'\xc5benraa'] = "That was a unicode key."
writePlist(pl, fileName)
Parse Plist example:
pl = readPlist(pathOrFile)
print pl["aKey"]
"""
__all__ = [
"readPlist", "writePlist", "readPlistFromString", "writePlistToString",
"readPlistFromResource", "writePlistToResource",
"Plist", "Data", "Dict"
]
# Note: the Plist and Dict classes have been deprecated.
import binascii
import datetime
from cStringIO import StringIO
2004-11-12 04:02:35 -04:00
import re
def readPlist(pathOrFile):
"""Read a .plist file. 'pathOrFile' may either be a file name or a
(readable) file object. Return the unpacked root object (which
usually is a dictionary).
"""
didOpen = 0
if isinstance(pathOrFile, str):
pathOrFile = open(pathOrFile)
didOpen = 1
p = PlistParser()
rootObject = p.parse(pathOrFile)
if didOpen:
pathOrFile.close()
return rootObject
def writePlist(rootObject, pathOrFile):
"""Write 'rootObject' to a .plist file. 'pathOrFile' may either be a
file name or a (writable) file object.
"""
didOpen = 0
if isinstance(pathOrFile, str):
pathOrFile = open(pathOrFile, "w")
didOpen = 1
writer = PlistWriter(pathOrFile)
writer.writeln("<plist version=\"1.0\">")
writer.writeValue(rootObject)
writer.writeln("</plist>")
if didOpen:
pathOrFile.close()
def readPlistFromString(data):
"""Read a plist data from a string. Return the root object.
"""
return readPlist(StringIO(data))
def writePlistToString(rootObject):
"""Return 'rootObject' as a plist-formatted string.
"""
f = StringIO()
writePlist(rootObject, f)
return f.getvalue()
def readPlistFromResource(path, restype='plst', resid=0):
"""Read plst resource from the resource fork of path.
"""
from Carbon.File import FSRef, FSGetResourceForkName
from Carbon.Files import fsRdPerm
from Carbon import Res
fsRef = FSRef(path)
resNum = Res.FSOpenResourceFile(fsRef, FSGetResourceForkName(), fsRdPerm)
Res.UseResFile(resNum)
plistData = Res.Get1Resource(restype, resid).data
Res.CloseResFile(resNum)
return readPlistFromString(plistData)
def writePlistToResource(rootObject, path, restype='plst', resid=0):
"""Write 'rootObject' as a plst resource to the resource fork of path.
"""
from Carbon.File import FSRef, FSGetResourceForkName
from Carbon.Files import fsRdWrPerm
from Carbon import Res
plistData = writePlistToString(rootObject)
fsRef = FSRef(path)
resNum = Res.FSOpenResourceFile(fsRef, FSGetResourceForkName(), fsRdWrPerm)
Res.UseResFile(resNum)
try:
Res.Get1Resource(restype, resid).RemoveResource()
except Res.Error:
pass
res = Res.Resource(plistData)
res.AddResource(restype, resid, '')
res.WriteResource()
Res.CloseResFile(resNum)
class DumbXMLWriter:
def __init__(self, file, indentLevel=0, indent="\t"):
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
self.file = file
self.stack = []
self.indentLevel = indentLevel
self.indent = indent
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
def beginElement(self, element):
self.stack.append(element)
self.writeln("<%s>" % element)
self.indentLevel += 1
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
def endElement(self, element):
assert self.indentLevel > 0
assert self.stack.pop() == element
self.indentLevel -= 1
self.writeln("</%s>" % element)
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
def simpleElement(self, element, value=None):
2003-07-10 11:26:06 -03:00
if value is not None:
value = _escapeAndEncode(value)
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
self.writeln("<%s>%s</%s>" % (element, value, element))
else:
self.writeln("<%s/>" % element)
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
def writeln(self, line):
if line:
self.file.write(self.indentLevel * self.indent + line + "\n")
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
else:
self.file.write("\n")
# Contents should conform to a subset of ISO 8601
# (in particular, YYYY '-' MM '-' DD 'T' HH ':' MM ':' SS 'Z'. Smaller units may be omitted with
# a loss of precision)
_dateParser = re.compile(r"(?P<year>\d\d\d\d)(?:-(?P<month>\d\d)(?:-(?P<day>\d\d)(?:T(?P<hour>\d\d)(?::(?P<minute>\d\d)(?::(?P<second>\d\d))?)?)?)?)?Z")
def _dateFromString(s):
order = ('year', 'month', 'day', 'hour', 'minute', 'second')
gd = _dateParser.match(s).groupdict()
lst = []
for key in order:
val = gd[key]
if val is None:
break
lst.append(int(val))
return datetime.datetime(*lst)
def _dateToString(d):
return '%04d-%02d-%02dT%02d:%02d:%02dZ' % (
d.year, d.month, d.day,
d.hour, d.minute, d.second
)
2004-11-12 04:02:35 -04:00
# Regex to find any control chars, except for \t \n and \r
_controlCharPat = re.compile(
r"[\x00\x01\x02\x03\x04\x05\x06\x07\x08\x0b\x0c\x0e\x0f"
r"\x10\x11\x12\x13\x14\x15\x16\x17\x18\x19\x1a\x1b\x1c\x1d\x1e\x1f]")
2004-11-12 04:02:35 -04:00
def _escapeAndEncode(text):
m = _controlCharPat.search(text)
if m is not None:
raise ValueError("strings can't contains control characters; "
"use plistlib.Data instead")
text = text.replace("\r\n", "\n") # convert DOS line endings
text = text.replace("\r", "\n") # convert Mac line endings
text = text.replace("&", "&amp;") # escape '&'
text = text.replace("<", "&lt;") # escape '<'
text = text.replace(">", "&gt;") # escape '>'
return text.encode("utf-8") # encode as UTF-8
PLISTHEADER = """\
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE plist PUBLIC "-//Apple Computer//DTD PLIST 1.0//EN" "http://www.apple.com/DTDs/PropertyList-1.0.dtd">
"""
class PlistWriter(DumbXMLWriter):
def __init__(self, file, indentLevel=0, indent="\t", writeHeader=1):
if writeHeader:
file.write(PLISTHEADER)
DumbXMLWriter.__init__(self, file, indentLevel, indent)
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
def writeValue(self, value):
if isinstance(value, str):
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
self.simpleElement("string", value)
elif isinstance(value, bool):
# must switch for bool before int, as bool is a
# subclass of int...
if value:
self.simpleElement("true")
else:
self.simpleElement("false")
elif isinstance(value, int):
self.simpleElement("integer", str(value))
elif isinstance(value, float):
self.simpleElement("real", repr(value))
elif isinstance(value, dict):
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
self.writeDict(value)
elif isinstance(value, Data):
self.writeData(value)
elif isinstance(value, datetime.datetime):
self.simpleElement("date", _dateToString(value))
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
elif isinstance(value, (tuple, list)):
self.writeArray(value)
else:
raise TypeError("unsuported type: %s" % type(value))
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
def writeData(self, data):
self.beginElement("data")
self.indentLevel -= 1
maxlinelength = 76 - len(self.indent.replace("\t", " " * 8) *
self.indentLevel)
for line in data.asBase64(maxlinelength).split("\n"):
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
if line:
self.writeln(line)
self.indentLevel += 1
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
self.endElement("data")
def writeDict(self, d):
self.beginElement("dict")
2007-02-21 17:18:18 -04:00
items = sorted(d.items())
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
for key, value in items:
if not isinstance(key, str):
raise TypeError("keys must be strings")
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
self.simpleElement("key", key)
self.writeValue(value)
self.endElement("dict")
def writeArray(self, array):
self.beginElement("array")
for value in array:
self.writeValue(value)
self.endElement("array")
class _InternalDict(dict):
# This class is needed while Dict is scheduled for deprecation:
# we only need to warn when a *user* instantiates Dict or when
# the "attribute notation for dict keys" is used.
def __getattr__(self, attr):
try:
value = self[attr]
except KeyError:
raise AttributeError, attr
from warnings import warn
warn("Attribute access from plist dicts is deprecated, use d[key] "
"notation instead", PendingDeprecationWarning)
return value
def __setattr__(self, attr, value):
from warnings import warn
warn("Attribute access from plist dicts is deprecated, use d[key] "
"notation instead", PendingDeprecationWarning)
self[attr] = value
def __delattr__(self, attr):
try:
del self[attr]
except KeyError:
raise AttributeError, attr
from warnings import warn
warn("Attribute access from plist dicts is deprecated, use d[key] "
"notation instead", PendingDeprecationWarning)
class Dict(_InternalDict):
def __init__(self, **kwargs):
from warnings import warn
warn("The plistlib.Dict class is deprecated, use builtin dict instead",
PendingDeprecationWarning)
super(Dict, self).__init__(**kwargs)
class Plist(_InternalDict):
"""This class has been deprecated. Use readPlist() and writePlist()
functions instead, together with regular dict objects.
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
"""
2004-10-25 13:09:10 -03:00
def __init__(self, **kwargs):
from warnings import warn
warn("The Plist class is deprecated, use the readPlist() and "
"writePlist() functions instead", PendingDeprecationWarning)
super(Plist, self).__init__(**kwargs)
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
def fromFile(cls, pathOrFile):
2004-10-25 13:09:10 -03:00
"""Deprecated. Use the readPlist() function instead."""
rootObject = readPlist(pathOrFile)
plist = cls()
plist.update(rootObject)
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
return plist
fromFile = classmethod(fromFile)
def write(self, pathOrFile):
2004-10-25 13:09:10 -03:00
"""Deprecated. Use the writePlist() function instead."""
writePlist(self, pathOrFile)
def _encodeBase64(s, maxlinelength=76):
# copied from base64.encodestring(), with added maxlinelength argument
maxbinsize = (maxlinelength//4)*3
pieces = []
for i in range(0, len(s), maxbinsize):
chunk = s[i : i + maxbinsize]
pieces.append(binascii.b2a_base64(chunk))
return "".join(pieces)
class Data:
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
"""Wrapper for binary data."""
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
def __init__(self, data):
self.data = data
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
def fromBase64(cls, data):
# base64.decodestring just calls binascii.a2b_base64;
# it seems overkill to use both base64 and binascii.
return cls(binascii.a2b_base64(data))
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
fromBase64 = classmethod(fromBase64)
def asBase64(self, maxlinelength=76):
return _encodeBase64(self.data, maxlinelength)
Restructure comparison dramatically. There is no longer a default *ordering* between objects; there is only a default equality test (defined by an object being equal to itself only). Read the comment in object.c. The current implementation never uses a three-way comparison to compute a rich comparison, but it does use a rich comparison to compute a three-way comparison. I'm not quite done ripping out all the calls to PyObject_Compare/Cmp, or replacing tp_compare implementations with tp_richcompare implementations; but much of that has happened (to make most unit tests pass). The following tests still fail, because I need help deciding or understanding: test_codeop -- depends on comparing code objects test_datetime -- need Tim Peters' opinion test_marshal -- depends on comparing code objects test_mutants -- need help understanding it The problem with test_codeop and test_marshal is this: these tests compare two different code objects and expect them to be equal. Is that still a feature we'd like to support? I've temporarily removed the comparison and hash code from code objects, so they use the default (equality by pointer only) comparison. For the other two tests, run them to see for yourself. (There may be more failing test with "-u all".) A general problem with getting lots of these tests to pass is the reality that for object types that have a natural total ordering, implementing __cmp__ is much more convenient than implementing __eq__, __ne__, __lt__, and so on. Should we go back to allowing __cmp__ to provide a total ordering? Should we provide some other way to implement rich comparison with a single method override? Alex proposed a __key__() method; I've considered a __richcmp__() method. Or perhaps __cmp__() just shouldn't be killed off...
2006-08-23 21:41:19 -03:00
def __eq__(self, other):
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
if isinstance(other, self.__class__):
Restructure comparison dramatically. There is no longer a default *ordering* between objects; there is only a default equality test (defined by an object being equal to itself only). Read the comment in object.c. The current implementation never uses a three-way comparison to compute a rich comparison, but it does use a rich comparison to compute a three-way comparison. I'm not quite done ripping out all the calls to PyObject_Compare/Cmp, or replacing tp_compare implementations with tp_richcompare implementations; but much of that has happened (to make most unit tests pass). The following tests still fail, because I need help deciding or understanding: test_codeop -- depends on comparing code objects test_datetime -- need Tim Peters' opinion test_marshal -- depends on comparing code objects test_mutants -- need help understanding it The problem with test_codeop and test_marshal is this: these tests compare two different code objects and expect them to be equal. Is that still a feature we'd like to support? I've temporarily removed the comparison and hash code from code objects, so they use the default (equality by pointer only) comparison. For the other two tests, run them to see for yourself. (There may be more failing test with "-u all".) A general problem with getting lots of these tests to pass is the reality that for object types that have a natural total ordering, implementing __cmp__ is much more convenient than implementing __eq__, __ne__, __lt__, and so on. Should we go back to allowing __cmp__ to provide a total ordering? Should we provide some other way to implement rich comparison with a single method override? Alex proposed a __key__() method; I've considered a __richcmp__() method. Or perhaps __cmp__() just shouldn't be killed off...
2006-08-23 21:41:19 -03:00
return self.data == other.data
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
elif isinstance(other, str):
Restructure comparison dramatically. There is no longer a default *ordering* between objects; there is only a default equality test (defined by an object being equal to itself only). Read the comment in object.c. The current implementation never uses a three-way comparison to compute a rich comparison, but it does use a rich comparison to compute a three-way comparison. I'm not quite done ripping out all the calls to PyObject_Compare/Cmp, or replacing tp_compare implementations with tp_richcompare implementations; but much of that has happened (to make most unit tests pass). The following tests still fail, because I need help deciding or understanding: test_codeop -- depends on comparing code objects test_datetime -- need Tim Peters' opinion test_marshal -- depends on comparing code objects test_mutants -- need help understanding it The problem with test_codeop and test_marshal is this: these tests compare two different code objects and expect them to be equal. Is that still a feature we'd like to support? I've temporarily removed the comparison and hash code from code objects, so they use the default (equality by pointer only) comparison. For the other two tests, run them to see for yourself. (There may be more failing test with "-u all".) A general problem with getting lots of these tests to pass is the reality that for object types that have a natural total ordering, implementing __cmp__ is much more convenient than implementing __eq__, __ne__, __lt__, and so on. Should we go back to allowing __cmp__ to provide a total ordering? Should we provide some other way to implement rich comparison with a single method override? Alex proposed a __key__() method; I've considered a __richcmp__() method. Or perhaps __cmp__() just shouldn't be killed off...
2006-08-23 21:41:19 -03:00
return self.data == other
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
else:
Restructure comparison dramatically. There is no longer a default *ordering* between objects; there is only a default equality test (defined by an object being equal to itself only). Read the comment in object.c. The current implementation never uses a three-way comparison to compute a rich comparison, but it does use a rich comparison to compute a three-way comparison. I'm not quite done ripping out all the calls to PyObject_Compare/Cmp, or replacing tp_compare implementations with tp_richcompare implementations; but much of that has happened (to make most unit tests pass). The following tests still fail, because I need help deciding or understanding: test_codeop -- depends on comparing code objects test_datetime -- need Tim Peters' opinion test_marshal -- depends on comparing code objects test_mutants -- need help understanding it The problem with test_codeop and test_marshal is this: these tests compare two different code objects and expect them to be equal. Is that still a feature we'd like to support? I've temporarily removed the comparison and hash code from code objects, so they use the default (equality by pointer only) comparison. For the other two tests, run them to see for yourself. (There may be more failing test with "-u all".) A general problem with getting lots of these tests to pass is the reality that for object types that have a natural total ordering, implementing __cmp__ is much more convenient than implementing __eq__, __ne__, __lt__, and so on. Should we go back to allowing __cmp__ to provide a total ordering? Should we provide some other way to implement rich comparison with a single method override? Alex proposed a __key__() method; I've considered a __richcmp__() method. Or perhaps __cmp__() just shouldn't be killed off...
2006-08-23 21:41:19 -03:00
return id(self) == id(other)
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
def __repr__(self):
return "%s(%s)" % (self.__class__.__name__, repr(self.data))
class PlistParser:
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
def __init__(self):
self.stack = []
self.currentKey = None
self.root = None
def parse(self, fileobj):
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
from xml.parsers.expat import ParserCreate
parser = ParserCreate()
parser.StartElementHandler = self.handleBeginElement
parser.EndElementHandler = self.handleEndElement
parser.CharacterDataHandler = self.handleData
parser.ParseFile(fileobj)
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
return self.root
def handleBeginElement(self, element, attrs):
self.data = []
handler = getattr(self, "begin_" + element, None)
if handler is not None:
handler(attrs)
def handleEndElement(self, element):
handler = getattr(self, "end_" + element, None)
if handler is not None:
handler()
def handleData(self, data):
self.data.append(data)
def addObject(self, value):
if self.currentKey is not None:
self.stack[-1][self.currentKey] = value
self.currentKey = None
elif not self.stack:
# this is the root object
self.root = value
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
else:
self.stack[-1].append(value)
def getData(self):
data = "".join(self.data)
try:
data = data.encode("ascii")
except UnicodeError:
pass
self.data = []
return data
# element handlers
def begin_dict(self, attrs):
d = _InternalDict()
2003-04-09 10:25:43 -03:00
self.addObject(d)
self.stack.append(d)
def end_dict(self):
self.stack.pop()
def end_key(self):
self.currentKey = self.getData()
def begin_array(self, attrs):
a = []
self.addObject(a)
self.stack.append(a)
def end_array(self):
self.stack.pop()
def end_true(self):
self.addObject(True)
def end_false(self):
self.addObject(False)
def end_integer(self):
self.addObject(int(self.getData()))
def end_real(self):
self.addObject(float(self.getData()))
def end_string(self):
self.addObject(self.getData())
def end_data(self):
self.addObject(Data.fromBase64(self.getData()))
def end_date(self):
self.addObject(_dateFromString(self.getData()))