Add versification table implementation

[Enkidu93]

Fixes #241

Once this goes through, a change will need to be made in Serval to the ZipParatextProjectSettingsParser.

---

This change is 

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 78.78788% with 14 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 70.26%. Comparing base (c304a75) to head (dcafca2).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/SIL.Machine/Corpora/VersificationTableBase.cs	68.42%	10 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
src/SIL.Machine/Corpora/ZipVersificationTable.cs	85.71%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #283   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   70.26%   70.26%           
=======================================
  Files         385      388    +3     
  Lines       31957    32008   +51     
  Branches     4488     4494    +6     
=======================================
+ Hits        22455    22492   +37     
- Misses       8463     8474   +11     
- Partials     1039     1042    +3     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[ddaspit]

Reviewed 6 of 6 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @Enkidu93 and @johnml1135)

---

src/SIL.Machine/Corpora/VersificationTableBase.cs line 7 at r1 (raw file):

namespace SIL.Machine.Corpora
{
    public abstract class VersificationTableBase : Versification.Table

Is there some way that we could make this implementation stateless? We don't want to save every versification that we load. It could create a subtle memory leak when applications use Machine. I wish there was some way we could bypass this table when loading a versification. Worse comes to worse, we could remove all custom versifications after we load a versification. If we could just make the proper Load method protected, then we could make a stateless table.

---

src/SIL.Machine/Corpora/FileParatextProjectSettingsParser.cs line 14 at r1 (raw file):

        {
            _projectDir = projectDir;
            Versification.Table.Implementation = new FileVersificationTable(projectDir);

Versification.Table.Implementation is a static singleton. If we try to use FileParatextProjectSettingsParser and ZipParatextProjectSettingsParser in the same process, then they might stomp on each other, causing the code to break in weird ways, since the wrong versification table implementation would be used. Is there some way we could use the same implementation for both parsers? Maybe use a special path for zip files.

[Enkidu93]

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @ddaspit and @johnml1135)

---

src/SIL.Machine/Corpora/FileParatextProjectSettingsParser.cs line 14 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, ddaspit (Damien Daspit) wrote…

Versification.Table.Implementation is a static singleton. If we try to use FileParatextProjectSettingsParser and ZipParatextProjectSettingsParser in the same process, then they might stomp on each other, causing the code to break in weird ways, since the wrong versification table implementation would be used. Is there some way we could use the same implementation for both parsers? Maybe use a special path for zip files.

OK, yes, I'll stew on it.

---

src/SIL.Machine/Corpora/VersificationTableBase.cs line 7 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, ddaspit (Damien Daspit) wrote…

Is there some way that we could make this implementation stateless? We don't want to save every versification that we load. It could create a subtle memory leak when applications use Machine. I wish there was some way we could bypass this table when loading a versification. Worse comes to worse, we could remove all custom versifications after we load a versification. If we could just make the proper Load method protected, then we could make a stateless table.

Yes, sorry! I think I forgot why we were doing this in the first place 😅 - looking into it. I think we may be able to get around adding the versification to the table.