python - traitant des multiples formes de données (dict et dict avec listes) - Stack Overflow

I have a situation where I can have data in the following form:

data = {
    'multiple': True,
    'data1': 'some_data',
    'repeats': [
        {'data1':{'section1': 'some_data', 'section2': 'some_more_data'}}
        {'data2':{'section1': 'some_data', 'section2': 'some_more_data'}}
    ]
}

and sometimes I will have this:

data = {
    'multiple': False,
    'data1': 'some_data',
    'section1a': 'some_data', 
    'section2a': 'some_more_data'}
}

I need to validate the data in sectionxy. Right now, I have a validate method that accepts data. In it, I am looking at 'multiple'. If it is multiple, I am doing something like this:

if multiple:
    for info in data['repeats']:
        validate_single(info.values()[0])
else:
    validate_single(data)

where validate_single looks at the value of section1 and section2

Is there a better approach to this? Is there some sort of way to flatten the first data, or expand the second data that would make more sense than what I am trying?

I have a situation where I can have data in the following form:

data = {
    'multiple': True,
    'data1': 'some_data',
    'repeats': [
        {'data1':{'section1': 'some_data', 'section2': 'some_more_data'}}
        {'data2':{'section1': 'some_data', 'section2': 'some_more_data'}}
    ]
}

and sometimes I will have this:

data = {
    'multiple': False,
    'data1': 'some_data',
    'section1a': 'some_data', 
    'section2a': 'some_more_data'}
}

I need to validate the data in sectionxy. Right now, I have a validate method that accepts data. In it, I am looking at 'multiple'. If it is multiple, I am doing something like this:

if multiple:
    for info in data['repeats']:
        validate_single(info.values()[0])
else:
    validate_single(data)

where validate_single looks at the value of section1 and section2

Is there a better approach to this? Is there some sort of way to flatten the first data, or expand the second data that would make more sense than what I am trying?

Source