Tweak SaveParameterFile

[Harry Jeffery]

Some changes suggested by Anders Markvardsen:

1. SavaParameterFile is not showing in the help-pages list of algorithms. Figure out why.
2. Rename the SaveLocationParameters property to LocationParameters. It's cleaner.
3. Add a python usage example to the SaveParameterFile documentation.

[Harry Jeffery]

Rename SaveParameterFile's SaveLocationParameters property.

Refs #10023

Changeset: f7a421331e967f350e13bacb680bb829bdc6df14

[Harry Jeffery]

Add SaveParametersFile python usage example.

Refs #10023

Changeset: e905a7ff85fcb266a66691e32a0741a9c46371e5

[Harry Jeffery]

Tidy up SaveParametersFile python usage example.

Refs #10023

Changeset: a36c795ff764156548989cc84be53d9c75c96ed6

[Harry Jeffery]

The solution to 1. was the missing .. categories directive in the documentation.

It has been added in the usage example changeset.

[Martyn Gigg]

Can I suggest another tidy up of the usage example.

The file it saves to is "/tmp...." which is only valid for unix-like systems. It should be more generic. In other cases for saving files we have gone for

filename = os.path.expanduser("~/params.xml")

so that we know the directory is writable on all platforms. Lets update this now so that it is more consistent with other places.

[Martyn Gigg]

The test also seems to fall over on the 14.04 build server:

​http://builds.mantidproject.org/view/Develop%20Builds/job/develop_ubuntu-14.04/347/consoleFull

[Harry Jeffery]

Fix failing SaveParameterFiles documentation test.

This commit fixes two issues.

1. The output file was not being written in a cross-platform friendly way. We now use os.path.expanduser to select a writable file path on any platform.

2. The usage example test was failing. This was caused by the faulty assumption that the output of SaveParameterFile is deterministic. The data it outputs is, but the actual ordering of elements in the XML isn't, so checking the raw contents of the XML file was an unreliable testing method. Instead we now rely on the unit test for SaveParameterFile and provide an example of the output to the user (and the pre-existing link to the parameter file wiki page).

Refs #10023

Changeset: 37ba90f665402e59d97679f71eed31360be57f57

[Martyn Gigg]

I think we should keep the usage example. They are not meant as tests of whether the algorithm is doing the right thing, as you say the unit test will cover that. It is important for a user to be able copy and paste something from the documentation and be able to run it.

The tests around them are to ensure that we haven't broken running this example. I would suggest putting the example back but instead simply check that the file has been written to the appropriate location and print a message saying so. The testoutput check can then be just check if the message was printed correctly.

I would also keep the example output that is already there as I agree it's a nice way of showing what the file might look like.

[Harry Jeffery]

Re add categories directive to SaveParameterFile docs.

This was accidentally removed in the previous commit.

Refs #10023

Changeset: 5ce0054bc99ee7e9a30cdce69eb73f994515f7a6

[Harry Jeffery]

Refs #10023. Tweak usage example testing

Changeset: 109696af6a297ac2f6db0b2260fd3eec6061fefc

[Martyn Gigg]

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/feature/10023_tweak_saveparameterfile_algorithm'

Full changeset: ​2eb59b2e6ccf5c2bb8551c76d7e9e159e0bb3a3d

[Stuart Campbell]

This ticket has been transferred to github issue ​10865