The question was asked a few times on freenode (by myself included). Just sharing my solution in case it’s useful for someone else:
https://coderwall.com/p/rxsmvw
best,
./A
The question was asked a few times on freenode (by myself included). Just sharing my solution in case it’s useful for someone else:
https://coderwall.com/p/rxsmvw
best,
./A
Please send a pull request to add something like this to core, but rather than a filter plugin, it really should be a lookup plugin.
with_hash_items: ahash
etc
–Michael
I was hoping you’d say that.
If this functionality is going to be part of core, I feel the following is a better way to access the individual items:
task:
… instead of item[0] for key and item[1] for value.
Open to suggestions of course.
best,
./A
"If this functionality is going to be part of core, I feel the following is a better way to access the individual items:
task:
Public service announcement: Using ${var} is unneccessary here.
with_hash_items: varname
You can do this for all lookup plugins.
Nobody should be using variables of form $x or ${x} anymore. They are included for backwards compatibility only.
Ali-Akber Saifee wrote:
task:
- name: echo
- action: command echo “{{ item.key item.value }}”
with_hash_items: ${var}
FWIW, I had to do something similar today and ended up using the “dictsort” Jinja2 filter:
task:
It even has parameters to control the sort order:
http://jinja.pocoo.org/docs/templates/#dictsort
You do have to user the item[0] and item[1] syntax, though, rather than item.key and item.value.
—Alan
Nice, wasn’t aware of this one!
We should add this to the section where we are discussing loops.