Features/add cli option

[luciecastella]

Closes #71

This adds a features allowing users to optionally type in the dimensions to check non-default dimensions in the validation of a project.
This is currently done with (edit) : --dimensions "['variable', 'region', 'foo']"

[luciecastella]

For now it works with --dimensions=variable,region,foo
But I could also try multiple entries as Philip suggested, I do not know which one is the more elegant

[danielhuppmann]

Tried to run this, but it seems that tests are now failing if a dimensions argument is not given (so this argument is now treated as required, not optional). Also, the test-definitions look fine but are not actually executed yet in any test.

About the approach:
I see a risk of unintuitive behavior when users add a whitespace (which one would do when following pep8-style), so the following would fail

nomenclature validate-project . --dimensions=foo, variable

I still think that something like

nomenclature validate-project . --dimensions="['foo', 'variable']"

would be preferable.
Maybe the following could be helpful? https://stackoverflow.com/a/47730333

[luciecastella]

I spent quite some time on an error because apparently ' and " are not behaving the same: --dimensions "['variable', 'region', 'foo']" works fine, --dimensions '["variable", "region", "foo"]' does not. Am I the only one who does not know that? If not, I will remember to indicate this clearly for the users, that might confuse people too.

And yes I will work on the tests execution.

[danielhuppmann]

Am I the only one who does not know that?

I didn't know that either, but if there are some examples (in the docs and the tests), it should be relatively straightforward for users to "automatically" use the right structure...

[luciecastella]

Yes OK I will do that

[luciecastella]

Hello!
New problem: I have issues giving the new cli arguments in the CliRunner invoke.
This is what I did

And result_valid ends up with an exit_code 2 even though the apparently same command line creates no error on my terminal. Any clue on how to write the invoke? I tried different things and looked online but I cannot figure out how it could be right

[phackstock]

Looks pretty good overall. Some comments below in line.
One more general comment about testing the failure states of the cli is that maybe we want to test for more than just the exit code. We want to assure that the cli fails in the way intended and not just that it fails in any way. What do you think @danielhuppmann, should this be added here or should this be subject of a possible follow-up PR?

[danielhuppmann]

We want to assure that the cli fails in the way intended and not just that it fails in any way. What do you think @danielhuppmann, should this be added here or should this be subject of a possible follow-up PR?

Agree with you @phackstock in principle, but let's do that as a follow-up PR.

[phackstock]

Thanks for addressing all the comments @luciecastella.
Good to be merged from my side.

[danielhuppmann]

Thanks @luciecastella, nice work!