A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2001-February/013253.html below:

[Python-Dev] one more restriction for from __future__ import ...

[Python-Dev] one more restriction for from __future__ import ... [Python-Dev] one more restriction for from __future__ import ...Jeremy Hylton jeremy@alum.mit.edu
Tue, 27 Feb 2001 18:50:30 -0500 (EST)
>>>>> "SM" == Skip Montanaro <skip@mojam.com> writes:

  Jeremy> The symbol table pass detects illegal future statements by
  Jeremy> comparing the current line number against the line number of
  Jeremy> the last legal futre statement.

  SM> Why not just add a flag (default false at the start of the
  SM> compilation) to the compiling struct that tells you if you've
  SM> seen a future-killer statement already?  Then if you see a
  SM> future statement the compiler can whine.

Almost everything is a future-killer statement, only doc strings and
other future statements are allowed.  I would have to add a
st->st_future_killed = 1 for almost every node type.

There are also a number of nodes (about ten) that can contain future
statements or doc strings or future killers.  As a result, I'd have to
add special cases for them, too.

Jeremy



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