<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div>Hi All,<br><br></div>Earlier this morning I had a slight tackle with a couple of the 3.4 bots (sorry everyone!). I fixed some problems in asdl.py - <a href="http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/21d46e3ae60c" target="_blank">http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/21d46e3ae60c</a> - and used the 'with' statement. Some bots don't have Python 2.6+ and couldn't bootstrap Python-ast.h/c<br>
<br>Two questions:<br><br></div>* Should I always check-in Python-ast.h and Python-ast.c when I touch asdl* ? The generated files are unchanged, it's only the timestamp that changed.<br></div></div></div></blockquote>
<div><br></div><div>If Python-ast.* are checked in then yes.</div><div>Â </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div></div>* Can we, in theory, use new Pythons for asdl* code, because Python-ast.* are, in fact, checked in so they don't have to be rebuilt by the bots or users?<br>
</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I don't see why not. the touch extension for hg is there specifically for these files to prevent having to regenerate them. </div></div></div></div>
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4