Re: [patch] this is a pyparted patch for 429185

[Patrick Devine <patrickd vmware com>]

On Tue, 13 May 2008, Jeremy Katz wrote:

> On Tue, 2008-05-13 at 10:04 +0200, Joel Andres Granados wrote:
> > nextvalidpartition = next_partition(validonly=true)
> > nextpartition = next_partition()
> >
> > my point being that the check for the validity of the partition, IMO, is better
> > put inside pyparted and not in a higher level.  This does not change the semantics
> > of the current calls.  the next_partition() will still work and will still return
> > the next partition, valid or invalid.  So stuff that uses that function will not
> > be invalid after the change.  It does change the semantics of the calls where we
> > want to ensure that the next partition is valid, it additionally does away with
> > the couple of lines that check for the validity.
>
> For the new API, we should just get rid of the next_partition() stuff
> altogether and do something iterator based --
>  for p in disk.partitions
> would be oh so nice :)  And at that point, we could make that just
> return active partitions[1], leaving the special cases to use a special
> case API.   But, veering off the course now

Yes, please don't reimplement the crufty old next_partition() stuff.  The 
partitions should be in a container class that implements __len__(), 
__getitem__(), etc.

I ended up having to wrap this in my own container class in the past and 
I'd love to get the 200 lines of code back.

--Patrick.